BETA

Activities of Hélène FLAUTRE

Plenary speeches (210)

'European Capital of Culture' event for 2005 - 2019
2016/11/22
Reinvigorating EU actions on human rights and democratisation with Mediterranean partners
2016/11/22
Commission strategy on services of general interest (SGI)
2016/11/22
Progress in implementing the area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ) in 2003
2016/11/22
Services of general interest
2016/11/22
Employment strategy and social policy
2016/11/22
The neighbours of the enlarged Europe: a new framework for relations with the neighbours to the east and south
2016/11/22
Crisis in the steel sector and the measures to be taken at Community level
2016/11/22
Preparation for the 2003 Spring summit (Brussels, 21-22 March 2003) (continuation)
2016/11/22
2002 Annual debate on an area of freedom, security and justice
2016/11/22
EC-Lebanon
2016/11/22
Services of general interest in Europe
2016/11/22
Refugee status for third country nationals and stateless persons
2016/11/22
Algeria
2016/11/22
Reception of applicants for asylum in Member States
2016/11/22
Human rights
2016/11/22
Euro-Mediterranean Foreign Ministers' meeting (Valencia, 22/23 April 2002)
2016/11/22
National strategies for safe and sustainable pensions
2016/11/22
Postal services
2016/11/22
Barcelona European Council
2016/11/22
Informing and consulting employees
2016/11/22
Employment guidelines for 2002/Joint employment report 2001
2016/11/22
European Company Statute
2016/11/22
European works council
2016/11/22
Safe and sustainable pensions
2016/11/22
Mediterranean region
2016/11/22
Human rights
2016/11/22
Competition between postal services
2016/11/22
Supplementary health insurance
2016/11/22
Social policy agenda
2016/11/22
Undeclared work
2016/11/22
MEDA
2016/11/22
Tunisia – Human rights – EU-Tunisia Agreement
2016/11/22
Special European Council (23-24 March 2000 in Lisbon)
2016/11/22
Company restructuring in Europe
2016/11/22
Employment
2016/11/22
Statement by the President
2016/11/22
Adoption of the Minutes of the previous sitting
2016/11/22
Votes
2016/11/22
Restructuring of firms
2016/11/22
Statement by Mr Prodi
2016/11/22
Conclusions of the UN Conference on Racism (‘Durban II’ – Geneva) (debate)
2016/11/22
Human rights in the world 2008 and the EU's policy on the matter (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/2336(INI)
Women's rights in Afghanistan
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2579(RSP)
Loss at sea of migrants' boats off the Libyan coast (debate)
2016/11/22
Interim Trade Agreement with Turkmenistan (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2513(RSP)
Interim Trade Agreement with Turkmenistan - Interim Agreement with Turkmenistan (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 1998/0304(CNS)
Resettlement of Guantánamo prisoners - Alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transport and illegal detention of prisoners (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2516(RSP)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Situation in the Middle East/Gaza Strip (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2504(RSP)
EU Annual report on human rights - French initiative at the UN on the decriminalisation of homosexuality (debate)
2016/11/22
Conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of highly qualified employment - Single application procedure for residence and work
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/0229(COD)
EU response to the world financial crisis: follow-up of the informal European Council from 7 November and of the G20 Summit from 15 November 2008 - Commission's legislative and work programme for 2009 (debate)
2016/11/22
Preparation of the European Council, including the situation of the global financial system (continuation of debate)
2016/11/22
Evaluation of EU sanctions as part of the EU's actions and policies in the area of human rights (A6-0309/2008, Hélène Flautre) (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/2031(INI)
Evaluation of EU sanctions as part of the EU's actions and policies in the area of human rights (debate)
2016/11/22
Evaluation of EU sanctions as part of the EU's actions and policies in the area of human rights (debate)
2016/11/22
Palestinian prisoners in Israel (debate)
2016/11/22
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2005/0167(COD)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
The Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/2576(RSP)
The Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/2576(RSP)
Natural disaster in China (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/2585(RSP)
Human Rights in the World 2007 and the EU's policy on the matter (A6-0153/2008, Marco Cappato) (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2274(INI)
Human Rights in the World 2007 and the EU's policy on the matter - EU Election Observation Missions (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2217(INI)
Situation in Burma (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/2561(RSP)
Seventh Human Rights Council of the United Nations (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/2526(RSP)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
EU/China summit - EU/China human rights dialogue (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2678(RSP)
Annual report of the European Union on Human Rights (debate)
2016/11/22
Strengthening the European Neighbourhood Policy (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2088(INI)
Christian communities in the Middle East (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2659(RSP)
Uzbekistan (debate)
2016/11/22
EUROMED (debate)
2016/11/22
EU-Russia Summit (debate)
2016/11/22
The humanitarian situation in Gaza
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2636(RSP)
Immigration - Legal migration - Policy priorities in the fight against illegal immigration of third-country nationals (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2251(INI)
Secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving member states of the Council of Europe (reports Fava and Marty) (debate)
2016/11/22
Implementation of the Council decision on the moratorium against death penalty (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2629(RSP)
Human rights dialogues and consultations on human rights with third countries (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2001(INI)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Palestine (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2560(RSP)
External dimension of the area of freedom, security and justice (continuation of debate)
2016/11/22
Human rights in the world – Moratorium on the death penalty (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2020(INI)
Euro-Mediterranean relations - Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2173(INI)
Moratorium on the death penalty (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2502(RSP)
Moratorium on the death penalty (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/2502(RSP)
Imposition of the death penalty on medical personnel in Libya (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2676(RSP)
Imposition of the death penalty on medical personnel in Libya (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2676(RSP)
Development of the Community’s railways – Certification of train drivers operating locomotives and trains on the railway system in the Community – International rail passengers’ rights and obligations (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2004/0047(COD)
Financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/0116(COD)
Financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide (vote)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/0116(COD)
Financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/0116(COD)
Situation in Gaza (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2660(RSP)
EC-Syria Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2150(INI)
Informal summit in Lahti and EU-Russia relations following the murder of journalist Anna Politkovskaya (debate)
2016/11/22
Freedom, security and justice – Immigration (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2627(RSP)
Turkey's progress towards accession (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2118(INI)
Mutual information procedure Integration of immigrants in the European Union European Union immigration policy (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2005/0204(CNS)
Human rights in Tunisia (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2583(RSP)
Human Rights in the World in 2005 and EU policy (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2005/2203(INI)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
The refugee camps in Malta (debate)
2016/11/22
Euro-Mediterranean policy/preparation for the next meeting of the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (debate)
2016/11/22
62nd session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNHCR, Geneva) (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2535(RSP)
The Human Rights and Democracy Clause (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2005/2057(INI)
Services (continuation of the debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2004/0001(COD)
Egypt: Violence against Sudanese refugees
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2006/2504(RSP)
European Neighbourhood Policy
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2004/2166(INI)
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Annual report of the Council on human rights
2016/11/22
Human rights and freedom of the press in Tunisia and evaluation of the World Summit on the Information Society held in Tunis
2016/11/22
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
"Secret detention centres" in Europe
2016/11/22
The Barcelona Process revisited
2016/11/22
Community railways
2016/11/22
Liberty and security
2016/11/22
Textiles and clothing after 2005 (continuation)
2016/11/22
Reform of the UN
2016/11/22
Fight against terrorism
2016/11/22
Human rights in the world 2004 and the EU's policy
2016/11/22
Area of freedom, security and justice
2016/11/22
Situation in Lebanon
2016/11/22
Voting time: see Minutes
2016/11/22
Togo
2016/11/22
EU relations with the Mediterranean region
2016/11/22
Human rights (Geneva, 14 March to 22 April 2005)
2016/11/22
Democracy, the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms in third countries
2016/11/22
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Turkey's progress towards accession
2016/11/22
Situation in Ukraine
2016/11/22
European Council of 4 and 5 November 2004
2016/11/22
Arms sales
2016/11/22
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Future of the area of freedom, security and justice
2016/11/22
Seizure of hostages and massacre in Beslan and the fight against terrorism
2016/11/22
Prolongation of detention by Member States of illegally staying third-country nationals beyond the 18-month time limit in violation of the Return Directive (debate)
2016/11/22
Syria: situation of certain vulnerable communities
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2014/2695(RSP)
Common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's instruments for external action - Instrument for stability - Financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide - Partnership instrument for cooperation with third countries - Establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation - European neighbourhood instrument - Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/0404(COD)
Gender aspects of the European framework of national Roma inclusion strategies - Progress made in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/2066(INI)
Gender aspects of the European framework of national Roma inclusion strategies - Progress made in the implementation of national Roma integration strategies (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/2066(INI)
EU and Member State measures to tackle the flow of refugees as a result of the conflict in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/2837(RSP)
Situation of the Roma people (debate)
2016/11/22
Situation of the Roma people (debate)
2016/11/22
Alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/2702(RSP)
Alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/2702(RSP)
Migratory flows in the Mediterranean, with particular attention to the tragic events off Lampedusa (debate)
2016/11/22
Situation in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
Programme of activities of the Lithuanian Presidency (debate)
2016/11/22
Situation in Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection (recast) - Application for international protection lodged in a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast version) - Establishment of 'Eurodac' for the comparison of fingerprints - Granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2008/0242(COD)
Situation of Syrian refugees in neighbouring countries (debate)
2016/11/22
2012 progress report on Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2012/2870(RSP)
2012 progress report on Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2012/2870(RSP)
Syria, with specific reference to the humanitarian situation (debate)
2016/11/22
Dialogue for a peaceful solution of the Kurdish issue in Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Situation in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
EU preparation for a possible influx of asylum seekers from Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2012/2814(RSP)
EU preparation for a possible influx of asylum seekers from Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2012/2814(RSP)
Alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2012/2033(INI)
Alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2012/2033(INI)
One-minute speeches (Rule 150)
2016/11/22
Situation in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
Latest developments in the Middle East, including the situation in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
EU-USA agreement on the use and transfer of PNR to the US Department of Homeland Security (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/0382(NLE)
EU-USA agreement on the use and transfer of PNR to the US Department of Homeland Security (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/0382(NLE)
Situation of migrants in Greece (debate)
2016/11/22
Enlargement report for Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/2889(RSP)
Situation in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
Situation in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
European Neighbourhood Policy (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/2157(INI)
Situation of the Roma in Member States (debate)
2016/11/22
Explanations of vote
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/0387(CNS)
Tensions between Turkey and the Republic of Cyprus (debate)
2016/11/22
European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (FRONTEX) (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/0039(COD)
Situation in the Arab world and North Africa - Situation in Yemen - Situation in Syria (debate)
2016/11/22
Situation in Syria, Bahrain and Yemen
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2011/2645(RSP)
Review of the European Neighbourhood Policy - Eastern Dimension - Review of the European Neighbourhood Policy - Southern Dimension
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2958(RSP)
EU framework for coordinating national Roma integration strategies (debate)
2016/11/22
Granting and withdrawing international protection (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/0165(COD)
EU response to the migration flows in North Africa and the Southern Mediterranean, in particular, in Lampedusa - Migration flows arising from instability: scope and role of EU foreign policy (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2269(INI)
2010 progress report on Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2996(RSP)
EU strategy on Roma inclusion (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2276(INI)
EU-Libya Framework Agreement
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2268(INI)
Cost of examining asylum seekers’ applications in Member States (debate)
2016/11/22
Fundamental rights in the European Union (2009) - Effective implementation after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2161(INI)
Single application procedure for residence and work (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2007/0229(COD)
Databases relating to racial and ethnic origin in the EU (debate)
2016/11/22
Agreement between the EC and Pakistan on readmission - Community readmission agreements with third countries (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/0036(NLE)
Situation of the Roma people in Europe (debate)
2016/11/22
Agreement between the EU and the USA on the processing and transfer of financial messaging data from the EU to the USA for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/0178(NLE)
Israeli military operation against the humanitarian flotilla and the Gaza blockade (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2010/2735(RSP)
European Refugee Fund for the period 2008 to 2013 (amendment of Decision No 573/2007/EC). Migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (amendment of Regulation (EC) No 1104/2008) - Migration from the Schengen Information System (SIS 1+) to the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II) (amendment of Decision 2008/839/JHA) - The establishment of a joint EU resettlement programme (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/0127(COD)
Second European Roma Summit (debate)
2016/11/22
2009 progress report on Croatia - 2009 progress report on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia - 2009 progress report on Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2768(RSP)
2009 progress report on Croatia - 2009 progress report on the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia - 2009 progress report on Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2768(RSP)
Progress made on resettling Guantánamo detainees and on closing Guantánamo (debate)
2016/11/22
EU-Tunisia relations (debate)
2016/11/22
Democratisation in Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Conclusions of the Foreign Affairs Council on the Middle East peace process, including the situation in eastern Jerusalem (debate)
2016/11/22
Restrictive measures affecting the rights of individuals following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty (debate)
2016/11/22
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Enlargement strategy 2009 concerning the countries of the western Balkans, Iceland and Turkey (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2009/2675(RSP)
Joint removals of irregular migrants to Afghanistan and other third countries (debate)
2016/11/22
One-minute speeches on matters of political importance
2016/11/22
Outcome of the referendum in Ireland (debate)
2016/11/22
Immigration, the role of Frontex and cooperation among Member States (debate)
2016/11/22
Immigration, the role of Frontex and cooperation among Member States (debate)
2016/11/22
Statement by the President-designate of the Commission (debate)
2016/11/22

Reports (3)

REPORT on the evaluation of EU sanctions as part of the EU’s actions and policies in the area of human rights PDF (275 KB) DOC (165 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2008/2031(INI)
Documents: PDF(275 KB) DOC(165 KB)
REPORT Report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing a financing instrument for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide (European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights) PDF (606 KB) DOC (627 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2006/0116(COD)
Documents: PDF(606 KB) DOC(627 KB)
REPORT on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA: follow-up of the European Parliament TDIP Committee report PDF (291 KB) DOC (184 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2012/2033(INI)
Documents: PDF(291 KB) DOC(184 KB)

Shadow reports (8)

REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Neighbourhood Instrument PDF (890 KB) DOC (1 MB)
2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2011/0405(COD)
Documents: PDF(890 KB) DOC(1 MB)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of research, studies, pupil exchange, remunerated and unremunerated training, voluntary service and au pairing (recast) PDF (511 KB) DOC (602 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2013/0081(COD)
Documents: PDF(511 KB) DOC(602 KB)
REPORT on the situation of unaccompanied minors in the EU PDF (238 KB) DOC (142 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2012/2263(INI)
Documents: PDF(238 KB) DOC(142 KB)
RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) PDF (133 KB) DOC (69 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2009/0165(COD)
Documents: PDF(133 KB) DOC(69 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 establishing a European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (FRONTEX) PDF (548 KB) DOC (552 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2010/0039(COD)
Documents: PDF(548 KB) DOC(552 KB)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) PDF (429 KB) DOC (581 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2009/0165(COD)
Documents: PDF(429 KB) DOC(581 KB)
REPORT on migration flows arising from instability: scope and role of EU foreign policy PDF (273 KB) DOC (189 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2010/2269(INI)
Documents: PDF(273 KB) DOC(189 KB)
REPORT Report with a proposal for a European Parliament recommendation to the Council on the ongoing negotiations on the EU-Libya Framework Agreement PDF (192 KB) DOC (126 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Dossiers: 2010/2268(INI)
Documents: PDF(192 KB) DOC(126 KB)

Opinions (2)

OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the Internal Security Fund, the instrument for financial support for external borders and visa
2016/11/22
Committee: AFET
Documents: PDF(223 KB) DOC(453 KB)
OPINION on the review of the European Neighbourhood Policy
2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Documents: PDF(104 KB) DOC(83 KB)

Written declarations (6)

Written declaration on the protection of human rights in closed institutions

Written declaration on investigating and remedying the abuse of power by large supermarkets operating in the European Union

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(78 KB) DOC(36 KB)
Authors: Caroline LUCAS, Gyula HEGYI, Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI, Harlem DÉSIR, Hélène FLAUTRE
Written declaration on the death penalty in Belarus

Written declaration on impunity of alleged perpetrators of genocide

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(75 KB) DOC(36 KB)
Authors: Johan VAN HECKE, Gabriele ZIMMER, Ana GOMES, Anders WIJKMAN, Hélène FLAUTRE
Written declaration on the establishment of a European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(100 KB) DOC(45 KB)
Authors: Georgios KOUMOUTSAKOS, Hélène FLAUTRE, Marian HARKIN, Vittorio PRODI
Written declaration on the labelling of goods from the Occupied Palestinian Territories

2016/11/22
Documents: PDF(98 KB) DOC(45 KB)
Authors: Arlene McCARTHY, Hélène FLAUTRE, Sirpa PIETIKÄINEN, Eva-Britt SVENSSON

Amendments (764)

Amendment 37 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
– having regard to the conclusions of the report of 26 November 2013 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, which highlighted the inappropriate conduct of law enforcement officials during the Gezi protests,
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 38 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 b (new)
– having regard to the fact that as a result of the Gezi protests and the excessive use of police force, six people were killed, including one police officer, and 8 041 were injured, and that at least 3 500 people were held in pre-trial detention, 112 of whom have remained in prison on the order of a judge, including members of the NGOs taking part in the Taksim Solidarity Platform, and that 108 of these people have been detained on charges of belonging to a terrorist organisation,
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 39 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 c (new)
– having regard to the speeches given on 16 November 2013 in Diyarbakır by Prime Minister Erdoğan and the President of the Iraqi Kurdistan region, Massoud Barzani, calling for a peaceful settlement of the Kurdish conflict,
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 40 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 d (new)
– having regard to the fact that, according to the UNHCR, in December 2013 Turkey was sheltering more than 560 000 refugees from Syria,
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 61 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the transformative power of negotiations between the Union and Turkey, which have provided Turkey with a clear reference for its reform process; stresses therefore the importance of credible accession negotiations based on a mutual commitment by Turkey and the Union to effective reforms furthering the democratic foundations of Turkish society, promoting fundamental values and producing positive change in the institutions, in legislation and, in the mentality of society; welcomes, therefore the opening of Chapter 22;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 71 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. StressNotes the simportance of achieving a common understanding between Turkey and the EU on the relevance for both the EU and Turkeyultaneous signing of the readmission agreement and of the roadmap leading to visa liberalisation; recalls that Turkey is one of the key transit countries for irregular migration to the EU and therefore calls on Turkey to sign and implement the readmission agreement without further delay; calls on the Commission in parallel to take steps towards visa liberalisation and stresses the clear benefits of facilitating access to the EU for business people, academics, students and representatives of civil society; calls for the implementation of this readmission agreement to be subject to democratic oversight in order to guarantee that the rights of the persons concerned are fully respected; calls on Turkey and the European Union to comply in full with their international and European human rights obligations, in particular as regards the principle of non- refoulement and access to the asylum procedure; calls on Turkey to put in place an effective asylum system in accordance with international standards;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 94 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Points to the crucial role of a system of checks and balances for any modern democratic State and the fundamental role that the Turkish Grand National Assembly must play at the centre of Turkey’s political system in providing a framework for dialogue and consensus-building across the political spectrum; expresses concern about political polarisation and the lack of readiness on the part of government and opposition to work towards consensus on key reforms; urges all political actors, the government and the opposition to work together to enhance a pluralistic vision in State institutions and to promote the modernisation and democratisation of the State and society; calls on the political majority to actively involve the minorivarious political forces and civil society in the deliberation process on relevant reforms and take into consideration, whenever possible, their interests and views in an inclusive manner;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 98 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Calls on the Government to guarantee the functioning of the Court of Accounts in accordance with international standards; calls on the Government to provide the institutions concerned, including the Turkish Grand National Assembly, and the public with complete access to the reports of the Court of Accounts, including the reports concerning the security forces;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 108 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Commends the Conciliation Committee for reaching consensus on 60 constitutional amendments and calls on its Members to continue their, but regrets the interruption of its work on a new Constitution for Turkey as this is essential for the reform process in Turkey; stresses the importance of achieving consensus in the framework of the constitutional reform process on an effective system of separation of powers and an inclusive definition of citizenship; underlines that Turkey, as a Member State of the Council of Europe, could benefit from active dialogue with the Venice Commission on the constitutional reform process; stresses that the rules governing the election and composition of the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors should be fully in line with the criteria of the Venice Commission; points out that these rules are a constitutional matter and that any reform of them should be adopted in a calm atmosphere and with the broadest possible consensus;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 114 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is concerned by the Government’s reaction to the corruption scandals in December 2013, and stresses that the authorities must ensure the independence of the judiciary in all circumstances, in line with European standards; stresses the need to establish a judicial police force working under the authority of a judge;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 132 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Takes the view that the protests in Gezi Park testify both to the existence in Turkey of a vibrant civil society and also the need for further vital reforms on the promotion of fundamental values; highlights the importance of including civil society more structurally in the decision making process; deeply regrets the loss of life amongst the protesters and the police forces, the excessive use of force by the police and the violent acts by a number of protesters; welcomes the on-going administrative investigations launched by the Ministry of Interior and the inquiries by the Ombudsman into complaints related to the events in Gezi Park and expects them to fully address the concerns without delay; calls on Turkey to adopt adequate internal review procedures and to establish an independent supervisory body for police offences; is of the opinion that the Gezi Park events underline the need for far-reaching reforms in order to ensure respect for freedom of assemblyfact that since Gezi work on other major projects has continued without consultation and despite the opposition of a large section of the population concerned, including the construction of a road on the campus of the Middle East Technical University in Ankara and the third bridge over the Bosphorus;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 143 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Deeply regrets the loss of life amongst the protesters and the police forces, the excessive use of force by the police and the violent acts by a number of protesters; welcomes the administrative investigations launched by the Ministry of the Interior and the inquiries by the Ombudsman into complaints relating to the events in Gezi Park, and expects them to fully address the concerns without delay; welcomes the Ombudsman’s proposed changes to the way in which force is used by the police; calls on Turkey to adopt adequate internal review procedures and to establish an independent supervisory body for police offences; deplores the fact that the judicial response to the death of protestors has been unsatisfactory, either because the police officers implicated were not prosecuted (in the case of the death of Abdullah Cömert), or because the trial has been marked by irregularities (in the case of the death of Ethem Sarısülük); is concerned by the action taken against health professionals, lawyers, academics, students and professional associations in connection with their non-violent actions during the Gezi events; welcomes the reform of the right to demonstrate proposed in the ‘democratisation package’; believes, however, that the Gezi Park events underline the need for far- reaching reforms in order to ensure respect for the freedom of assembly;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 150 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Expresses concerns at the very limited coverage of the Gezi Park events by Turkish media and the dismissal of journalists who criticised the Government’s reactions to such events, particularly in the cases of Can Dündar of Milliyet and Yavuz Baydar of Sabah; expresses concern at the dismissal of journalists who have criticised the Government in other circumstances, particularly in the cases of Hasan Cemal of Milliyet and Nazlı Ilıcak of Sabah; recalls that freedom of expression and media pluralism are at the heart of European values and that an independent press is crucial to a democratic society; reiterates once again its concern at the fact that most media are owned by and concentrated in, large conglomerates with a wide range of business interests and points out to the worrying widespread phenomenon of self-censorship by media owners and journalists; expresses concern at the particularly high number of journalists currently in pre-trial detention and calls on Turkey’s judicial authorities to review and address these cases as soon as possible;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 159 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Highlights the special role of public- service media in strengthening democracy, in particular by serving information needs of citizens and enabling their participation in decision making processes. In this respect, calls on the authorities to ensure their independence and sustainability in compliance with European standards;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 162 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that the Parliament's Ad Hoc Delegation for the Observation of Trials of Journalists in Turkey, established in 2011 and referred to in its Resolution on the 2011 Progress Report on Turkey and in its Resolution on the 2012 Progress Report on Turkey, has presented the Interim Activity Report in 2013, based on factual observations, and will deliver the Final Activity Report in the first semester of 2014;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 167 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Notes the concerns in Turkish society about the excessively wide scope and the shortcomings of the proceedings in the Ergenekon case, which, like in the Sledgehammer case and the conviction of Füsun Erdoğan, undermined the acceptance of the ruling; expresses concern at the judicial harassment to which Pınar Selek has been subjected for 16 years; stresses, once again, in light of the above, that the KCK case must demonstrate the strength and the proper, independent, impartial and transparent functioning of Turkey’s democratic institutions and judiciary, as well as the firm, unconditional commitment to respect for fundamental rights;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 172 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the implementation of the third judicial reform package has led to the release of a significant number of detainees and welcomes the fourth judicial reform package as another important step towards a judiciary in Turkey in line with EU standards and values; welcomes the work of Justice Minister Sadullah Ergin on the ambitious reforms which he has introduced; notes, in particular, (i) the new, important distinction between freedom of expression and incitement to violence or to committing acts of terrorism, (ii) the limitation of the offence of praising a crime or a criminal to instances where there is a clear and imminent danger to public order and (iii) the narrowing down of the scope of the offence of committing a crime in the name of an organisation, without being a member of it, to armed organisations only;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 179 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Welcomes the release of the arrested MPs following the Constitutional Court decision, given that the duration of their pre-trial detention was a violation of their fundamental rights;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 197 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Commends the decision by the Assembly of Foundations to return the lands of the historic Mor Gabriel Monastery to the Syriac community in Turkey, in compliance with the pledge taken by the Government in the Democratisation package; stresses the importance to continue the process of reform in the area of freedom of thought, conscience and religion by enabling religious communities to obtain legal personality, by eliminating all restrictions on the training, appointment and succession of clergy, by complying with the relevant judgments of the ECtHR and the recommendations of the Venice Commission and by eliminating all forms of discrimination or barriers based on religion; notes that progress has been particularly slow in extending the rights of the Alevi minority; calls on the Government to give consideration to the request from Alevi associations for cemevis to be recognised as places of worship; underlines the importance of lifting all obstacles to a speedy reopening of the Halki Seminary;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 207 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Expresses support for the database on violence against women currently under preparation by the Ministry for Family and Social policies; asks to complement existing legislation on the creation of shelters for women who are victims of domestic violence with adequate follow-up mechanisms where municipalities fail to establish such shelters; supports the efforts of the Minister for Family and Social policies to raise penalties for forced early marriages, which must be eradicated; renews its concern at the low level of women’s participation in the labour force, in politics and at senior level in the administration and encourages the Government to adopt adequate measures to promote a more central role of women in the economic and political fabric of Turkey; welcomes the work of the Minister for Family and Social Policies, Fatma Şahin, on the ambitious reforms which she has introduced in these areas;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 219 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Strongly supports the Government’s initiative to strive for a settlement of the Kurdish problem on the basis of negotiations with the PKK; encourages the Government to devise the reforms directed at promoting the social, cultural and economic rights of the Kurdish community on the basis of adequate consultation of relevant stakeholders and the opposition; calls on the parties; welcomes the Government’s openness and the promise to authorise mother-tongue teaching in private schools; believes, nevertheless, that mother-tongue teaching should be provided in state education; welcomes the promise to authorise changing the names of villages and provinces and calls for the local population to be closely involved in the name-change decision; calls on the various opposition parties to actively support the negotiations and the reforms as an important step for the benefit of Turkish society at large; calls on the Turkish authorities to cooperate closely with the European Commission to assess which programs under IPA could be used to promote sustainable development in the South East in the framework of negotiations on Chapter 22;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 229 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that social dialogue and involvement of social partners are vital for the development of a prosperous society; Underlines the importance of further progress in the areas of social policy and employment, in particular to remove all obstacles to the effective functioning of trade unions, to establish a national employment strategy, address undeclared work, widen the coverage of social protection mechanisms, and increase employment rates among women and people with disabilities; notes the gradual implementation of laws 6289 and 6356 on trade union rights in the private and public sector but is concerned by the obstacles remaining to the effective functioning of trade unions; is particularly concerned about the absence of protection from discrimination against trade unionists in companies with fewer than 30 employees; calls for trade union laws to be implemented in accordance with the ILO international standards which Turkey has ratified;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 263 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Reiterates its strong support for the reunification of Cyprus, based on a fair and viable settlement for both communities; asks Turkey to actively supportsupports the efforts to relaunch the negotiations aimed at a fair, comprehensive and viable settlement under the auspices of the UN Secretary-General and in accordance with the relevant UNSC resolutions; calls on Turkey to begin withdrawing its forces from Cyprus and to transfer the sealed-off area of Famagusta to the UN in accordance with UNSC Resolution 550 (1984); calls on the Republic of Cyprus to open the port of Famagusta, under EU customs supervision, in order to promote a positive climate for the successful solution of the ongoing reunification negotiations, and to allow Turkish Cypriots to trade directly in a legal manner that is acceptable to all; takes note of the proposals by the Government of Cyprus to address the above issues;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 309 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Notes that Turkey continues to be the EU’s sixth biggest trading partner and that the EU is Turkey’s biggest with 38% of Turkey’s total trade going to the EU and almost 71% of FDI coming from the EU; welcomes the ongoing Commission evaluation of the EU-Turkey Customs Union with the aim of assessing its impact on both parties and ways to update it; calls on the Commission to keep Turkey informed during negotiations on the signing of a free-trade agreement with third countries;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 322 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Believes that, in view of Turkey’s strategic role as an energy hub, consideration should be given to the value of opening negotiations on Chapter 15 on energy; underlines that energy and climate efficiency priorities need to be addressed; calls on Turkey to publish a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target as soon as possible; calls on Turkey not to exclude major projects such as Istanbul’s third airport, the third bridge or the planned nuclear plants from the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive; notes the implementation of Law No 6446 on the electricity market, but regrets the inclusion of a provisional article allowing public and privatised electricity generating companies not to comply with environmental laws until 2018; calls on Turkey to adjust its energy mix in favour of renewables, of which the country has abundant sources, and calls on the Commission to prioritise its funding on renewable energy projects and the electricity grid in Turkey;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 329 #

2013/2945(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Welcomes Turkey’s commitment to the provision of humanitarian assistance to Syrian refugees; notes that a large number of foreign fighters in Syria gain access to Syria via Turkey and asks Turkey to increase border patrols, restricasks Turkey to control its borders in order to prevent the entry of fighters and arm flows to groups credibly found to be implicated in systematic human rights violations; welcomes the role played by Turkey in supporting the democratic opposition in Syria; believes that the EU and Turkey should actively seek to develop a joint strategic vision to promote a political solution in Syria and support political and economic stability in the region, with particular reference to Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq;
2014/01/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 1 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, notably its Articles 24, 27 and 40,
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 6 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 36 a (new)
– having regard to US Presidential Policy Directive PPD-28 on Signals Intelligence Activities of 17 January 2014,
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the ties between Europe and the United States of America are based on the spirit and principles of democracy and rule of law, liberty, justice and solidarity;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 15 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas, given that the EU's core aim is to promote freedom of the individual, security measures, including counterterrorism measures, must be pursued through the rule of law and must be subject to fundamental rights obligations, including those relating to privacy and data protection;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 21 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas in September 2001 the world entered a new phase which resulted in the fight against terrorism being listed among the top priorities of most governments; whereas the revelations based on leaked documents from whistleblower Edward Snowden, former NSA contractor, put democratically -elected leaders under anthe obligation to address the challenges of the increasing capabilities ofoverseeing and controlling intelligence agencies in surveillance activities and their implications forcting outside the rule of law in a democratic society;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D – point 2
· the high risk of violation of EU legal standards, fundamental rights and data protection standards;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D – point 5
· the degreelack of control and effective oversight by the US political authorities and certain EU Member States over their intelligence communities;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 31 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D – point 6
· the possibilityfact of these mass surveillance operations being used for reasons other than national security and the strict fight against terrorism, for example economic and industrial espionage or profiling on political grounds;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 34 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D – point 8
· the increasingly blurred boundaries between law enforcement and intelligence activities, leading to every citizen being treated as a suspect and being surveilled;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 38 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D – point 9 a (new)
the undermining of the communications with members of a profession with a confidentiality privilege such as lawyers, journalists, physicians or priests;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 42 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas the US authorities have denied some of the information revealed but not contested the vast majority of it; whereas the public debate has developed on a large scale in the US and in a limited number of EU Member States; whereas EU governments too often remain silent and fail to launch adequate investigations;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 52 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas US President Barrack Obama in his speech on 17 January has announced some policy changes to the mass surveillance programmes, he has not called for changes in legislation, particularly the prohibition of mass surveillance activities and bulk processing of personal data and the introduction of legal redress for non-US persons;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 58 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas in all Member States the law protects from disclosure information communicated in confidence between lawyer and client, a principle which has been recognised by the European Court of Justice26a; __________________ 26a Judgement of 18 May 1982 in case C- 155/79, AM & S Europe Limited v Commission of the European Communities
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N
N. whereas according to Article 67(3) TFEU the EU "shall endeavour to ensure a high level of security"; whereas the provisions of the Treaty (in particular Article 4(2) TEU, Article 72 TFEU and Article 73 TFEU) imply that the EU disposes of certain competences on matters relating to the collective external security of the Union; whereas the EU has exercised competence in matters of internal security (Article 4(j) TFEU) and has exercised this competence by deciding on a number of legislative instruments and concluding international agreements (PNR, TFTP) aimed at fighting serious crime and terrorism and by setting -up an internal security strategy and agencies working in this field;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital P
P. whereas, underin accordance with Article 6 TEU, covering the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the ECHR, Member States' agencies and even private parties acting in the field of national security also have to respect the rights enshrined therein, be they of their own citizens or of citizens of other States; whereas this also goes forgoes also as far as cooperation with other States' authorities in the field of national security is concerned;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Q. whereas the extra-territorial application by a third country of its laws, regulations and other legislative or executive instruments in situations falling under the jurisdiction of the EU or its Member States may impact on the established legal order and the rule of law, or even violate international or EU law, including the rights of natural and legal persons, taking into account the extent and the declared or actual aim of such an application; whereas, in these exceptional circumstances, it is necessary to take action at the EU level to ensure that the rule of law, and the rights of natural and legal persons are respected within the EU, in particular by removing, neutralising, blocking or otherwise countering the effects of the foreign legislation concerned;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital AC
AC. whereas according to the information revealed and to the findings of the inquiry conducted by the LIBE Committee, the national security agencies of New Zealand and Canada have beenare involved on ain large scale in mass surveillance of electronic communications and have actively cooperated with the US, the UK and Australia, under the so called "Five eyes" programme, and may have exchanged with each other personal data of EU citizens transferred from the EU to each other;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 82 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital AI
AI. whereas national data protection authorities have developed binding corporate rules (BCRs) in order to facilitate international transfers within a multinational corporation with adequate safeguards with respect to the protection of the privacy and fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals and as regards the exercise of the corresponding rights; whereas before being used, BCRs need to be authorised by the Member States’ competent authorities after the latter have assessed compliance with Union data protection law; whereas BCRs for data processors have been rejected in the LIBE Committee report on the General Data Protection Regulation, as they would leave the data controller and the data subject without any control over the jurisdiction in which their data is processed;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital BA a (new)
BAa. whereas US intelligence agencies have a policy of systematically undermining cryptographic protocols and products in order to be able to intercept even encrypted communication; whereas the US National Security Agency has collected vast numbers of so called "zero- day exploits" – IT security vulnerabilities that are not yet known to the public or the product vendor; whereas such activities massively undermine global efforts to improve IT security;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital BA b (new)
BAb. whereas IT vendors often deliver products that have not been properly tested for IT security or that even sometimes have back-doors implanted purposefully by the vendor; whereas the lack of liability rules for software vendors has led to such a situation which is in turn exploited by intelligence agencies, but also leaves the risk of attacks by other entities;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 105 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital BB
BB. whereas intelligence services perform an important functioncan provide help in protecting the democratic society against internal and external threats subject to democratic accountability and judicial oversight; whereas they are given special powers and capabilities to this end; whereas these powers are to be limited to the extent strictly necessary and proportionate and used within the rule of law, as otherwise they risk losing legitimacy and erodinge the democratic nature of society;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 111 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital BD
BD. whereas technological developments have led tobeen used for increased international intelligence cooperation, also involving the exchange of personal data, and often blurring the line between intelligence and law enforcement activities;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 115 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital BE
BE. whereas most of existing national oversight mechanisms and bodies were set up or revamped in the 1990s and have not necessarily been adapted to the rapid political and technological developments over the last decade;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 126 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Points out specifically to US NSA intelligence programmes allowing for the mass surveillance of EU citizens through direct access to the central servers of leading US internet companies (PRISM programme), the analysis of content and metadata (Xkeyscore programme), the circumvention of online encryption (BULLRUN), access to computer and telephone networks, and access to location data, as well as to systems of the UK intelligence agency GCHQ such as itsthe upstream surveillance activity (Tempora programme) and the decryption programme (Edgehill); believethe targeted man- in-the-middle attacks on information systems (Quantumtheory and Foxacid programmes); the collection and retention of 200 million SMS text messages per day (Dishfire programme); considers that the existence of programmes of a similar nature, even if on a more limited scaledimension, is likely in other EU countries such as France (DGSE), Germany (BND) and Sweden (FRA);
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 130 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Notes the allegations of ‘hacking’ or tapping into the Belgacom systems by the UK intelligence agency GCHQ; reiteranotes the indication by Belgacom that it could not confirm that EU institutions were targeted or affected, and that the malware used was extremely complex and required the use of extensive financial and staffing resources for its development and use that would not be available to private entities or hackers;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 138 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that several governments claim that these mass surveillance programmes are necessary to combat terrorism; wholeheartedly supports the fight against terrorism, but strongly believes that it can never in itself never be a justification for untargeted, secret, and sometimes even illegal mass surveillance programmes; expresses concerns, therefore, regarding the legality, necessity and proportionality of these programmesdeems such programmes disproportionate and incompatible with the concept of a democratic society based on the rule of law;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 145 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Considers it very doubtful that data collection of such magnitude isbe not only guided by the fight against terrorism, as it involves the collection of all possible data of all citizens; points therefore to the possible existence of other power motives such as political and economic espionage;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 154 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Condemns in the strongest possible terms the vast, systemic, blanket collection of the personal data of innocent people, often comprising intimate personal information; emphasises that the systems of mass, indiscriminate surveillance by intelligence services constitute a serious interference with the fundamental rights of citizens; stresses that privacy is not a luxury right, but that it is the foundation stone of a free and democratic society; points out, furthermore, that mass surveillance has potentially severe effects on the freedom of the press, thought and speech and on freedom of assembly and of association, as well as a significant potential for abuse of the information gathered against political adversaries; emphasises that these mass surveillance activities appear also tlso entail illegal actions by intelligence services and raise questions regarding the extra-territoriality of national laws;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 160 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Is adamant that secret laws, treaties and courts violate the rule of law; points outinsists that any judgment of a court or tribunal and any decision of an administrative authority of a non-EU sState authorising, directly or indirectly, surveillance activities such as those examined by this inquiry may not be automaticallythe transfer of personal data, may not be recogniszed or enforced, but must be submitted individually to the appropria in any manner, without prejudice to a mutual legal assistance treaty or an inte rnational procedures on mutual recognition and legal assistance, including rules imposed by bilateral agreementsagreement in force between the requesting third country and the Union or a Member State and a prior authorisation by the competent supervisory authority;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that the abovementioned concerns are exacerbated by rapid technological and societal developments; considers that, since internet and mobile devices are everywhere in modern daily life (‘ubiquitous computing’) and the business model of most internet companies is based on the processing of personal data of all kinds that puts at risk the integrity of the person, the scale of this problem is unprecedented; underlines that this may create a "turnkey tyranny" situation that can severely be misused in case of changes in political leadership;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 169 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Strongly rejects the notion that these issues are purely a matter of national security and therefore the sole competence of Member States; recalls a recent ruling of the Court of Justice according to which ‘although it is for Member States to take the appropriate measures to ensure their internal and external security, the mere fact that a decision concerns State security cannot result in European Union law being inapplicable’38 ; recalls further that the protection of the privacy of all EU citizens is at stake, as are the security and reliability of all EU communication networks; believes therefore that discussion and action at EU level is not only legitimate, but also a matter of EU autonomy and sovereignty; __________________ 38 No 1 BvR 518/02 of 4 April 2006. Judgement in case C-300/11, ZZ v Secretary of State for the Home Department, 4 June 2013
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 173 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Commends the current discussions, inquiries and reviews concerning the subject of this iInquiry in several parts of the world; points to the Global Government Surveillance Reform signed up to by the world's leading technology companies, which callsing for sweeping changes to national surveillance laws, including an international ban on bulk collection of data to help preserve the public's trust in the internet; points to the call by hundreds of leading academics for ending mass surveillance38a; points to the calls by many civil society organisations for ending mass surveillance38b and for the strict adherence of necessity and proportionality into surveillance measures38c; points to the call by a large group of authors, including a number of Nobel prize winners, along similar lines38d, notes with great interest the recommendations published recently by the US President's Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies; strongly urges governments to take these calls and recommendations fully into account and to overhaul their national frameworks for the intelligence services in order to implement appropriate safeguards and oversight; __________________ 38a www.academicsagainstsurveillance.net 38b www.stopspyingonus.com 38c www.en.necessaryandproportionate.org 38d www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/buecher/ themen/autoren-gegen- ueberwachung/demokratie-im-digitalen- zeitalter-der-aufruf-der-schriftsteller- 12702040.html
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 182 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new) after heading «Recommendations»
18a. Calls on EU Member States to drop criminal charges, if any, against Edward Snowden and to offer him protection from prosecution, extradition or rendition by third parties, in recognition of his status as whistleblower and international human rights defender;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 185 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Calls on the US to drop any criminal charges Edward Snowden in recognition of his status as whistleblower and international human rights defender;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 186 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Draws attention to the plight of other whistleblowers and their supporters, including any journalists involved, who find themselves under pressure from government authorities;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on the US as well as EU and Member States' legislators to revise legislation on electronic communications and signals intelligence and the processing and transfer of such intelligence information to fully respect the principles of legality, legitimate aim and purpose limitation, necessity, adequacy, proportionality, authorisation by a competent judicial authority, due process, user notification, transparency, public and parliamentary oversight, protection of the integrity of communications and systems, including safeguards for international cooperation and against illegitimate access;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on certainall EU Member States, including the UK, Germany, France, Sweden and the Netherlands, toand in particular those participating in the so- called "9-eyes" and "14-eyes" programmes, to comprehensively evaluate and revise where necessary their national legislation and practices governing the activities of intelligence services – including their (strategic) surveillance powers, authorisation procedures and oversight mechanisms - so as to ensure that they are in line with the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights and comply with their fundamental rights obligations as regards data protection, privacy and, presumption of innocence; in particular, given the extensive media reports referring to mass surveillance in the UK, would emphasise that the current legal framework which is made up of a ‘complex interaction’ between three separate pieces of legislation – the Human Rights Act 1998, the Intelligence Services Act 1994 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 – should be revised;, the necessity and proportionality of surveillance activities, as well as parliamentary and judicial oversight, the UN compilations of good practices38g and the recommendations of the Venice Commission38h; __________________ 38g United Nations General Assembly, A/HRC/14/46, 17 May 2010. 38h European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission): Report on Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights, CDL-AD(2010)022, adopted 4 June 2010; Report on the Democratic Oversight of the Security Services, CDL- AD(2007)016, adopted 2 June 2007.
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 207 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on UK to revise their national legislation and practices governing the activities of intelligence services so as to ensure that they are in line with the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights and comply with their fundamental rights obligations as regards data protection, privacy and presumption of innocence; in particular, given the extensive media reports referring to mass surveillance in the UK, would emphasise that the current legal framework which is made up of a 'complex interaction' between three separate pieces of legislation – the Human Rights Act 1998, the Intelligence Services Act 1994 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 – should be revised;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 208 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Calls on France to revise its legal framework in the field of intelligence activities in order to comply with the European Convention on Human Rights' requirements, to strengthen its general oversight mechanisms, both as regards the ex ante authorisation procedures, the involvement of the Parliament in the monitoring of intelligence activities and the reinforcement of technical capabilities and investigative powers of the latter. Moreover, existing independent administrative authorities should be entitled to monitor more closely and effectively the processing of data collected by the various intelligence agencies. Urges French government to clarify its relations and potential agreements with telecommunication companies as regards access to and exchange of personal data and access to communication facilities including Transatlantic cables;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 209 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Calls on Germany to revise the law on the German foreign intelligence service (BND) and the G-10 Law by making them more specific and ending the mass surveillance of cross-border telecommunications by the BND, reinforcing the rights of all persons whose communications are intercepted, providing for more public information in particular as to the activities of the G10 Commission, reinforcing the technical capabilities and investigative powers of the parliamentary oversight bodies; underlines in this context that under the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights governments have to respect and protect fundamental rights, including the secrecy of communications, of all persons, not only of their own citizens and residents;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 210 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)
20d. Calls on Sweden to revise the internet laws which authorised the National Defence Radio Establishment (FRA) to monitor communications traffic into and out of Sweden, cable bound as well as in the ether (radio and satellite), including emails, text messages and telephone calls and Act on signals intelligence which allows for the bulk transfer of data to other states if authorised by the Government, in order to specify the means and the scope of the surveillance and to improve the foreseeability of law which would enable an individual to foresee whether their communication or data about their communication is collected by FRA; recommends further to reinforce the system of checks and balances in oversight of the signals intelligence by including at the composition of the Inspection for Defence Intelligence Operations the parliamentarians in office;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 211 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 e (new)
20e. Takes note of the review of the Dutch Intelligence and Security Act 2002 (report by the "Dessens Commission" of 2 December 2013); supports those recommendations of the review commission which aim to strengthen the transparency of and the control and oversight on the Dutch intelligence services; calls on the Netherlands to refrain from extending the powers of the intelligence services so that untargeted and large-scale surveillance could also be performed on cable-bound communications of innocent citizens, especially given the fact that one of the biggest Internet Exchange Points in the world is located in Amsterdam (AMS-IX); calls for caution in defining the mandate and capabilities of the new Joint Sigint Cyber Unit, as well as for the presence and operation by US intelligence personnel on Dutch territory;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 212 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 f (new)
20f. Calls on Poland to revise police and secret services' powers (in particular as far as their access to citizens' personal data from various sources is concerned) and introduce an independent supervisory mechanism over their activity, notably in the area of intelligence and general crime prevention; strongly recommends that Poland properly applies freedom of information laws with respect to national security issues in accordance with the Global Principles on the National Security and Access to Information, recently endorsed by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in its Resolution 1954 (2013) on National security and access to information; recommends further that any freedom of information requests shall be duly and adequately treated, notably when relevant for explaining government involvement in programs of mass surveillance and for thereby holding decision-makers accountable;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 222 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Notes that the companies identified by media revelations as being involved in the large- scale mass surveillance of EU data subjects by US NSA are companies that have self-certified their adherence to the Safe Harbour, and that the Safe Harbour is the legal instrument used for the transfer of EU personal data to the US (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo!, Facebook, Apple, LinkedIn); expresses its concerns onis alarmed by the fact that these organisations admitted that they do not encrypt information and communications flowing between their data centres, thereby enabling intelligence services to intercept information39 ; __________________ 39 The Washington Post, 31 October 2013. The Washington Post, 31 October 2013.
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 224 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Considers that large-scale access by US intelligence agencies to EU personal data processed by Safe Harbour does not per se meet the criteria for derogation under ‘national security’;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 233 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Calls on the Commission to present by June 2014 a comprehensive assessment of the US privacy framework covering commercial, law enforcement and intelligence activities in response to the fact that the EU and the US legal systems for protecting personal data are drifting apartand concrete recommendations and consequences based on the absence of a general data protection law in the US;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 237 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
37. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to assess without delay whether the adequate level of protection of the New Zealand and of the Canadian Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, as declared by Commission Decisions 2013/6540 and 2/2002 of 20 December 2001, have been affected by the involvement of their national intelligence agencies in the mass surveillance of EU citizens and, if necessary, to take appropriate measures to suspend or revers the adequacy decisions; also calls on the Commission to assess the situation for other countries that have received an adequacy rating; expects the Commission to report to the European Parliament on its findings on the abovementioned countries by December 2014 at the latest; __________________ 40 OJ L 28, 30.1.2013, p. 12.
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 238 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
39. Calls on the Member States to prohibit or suspend data flows to third countries based on the standard contractual clauses, contractual clauses or BCRs authorised by the national competent authorities where it is established that the law to which the data importerrecipient is subject imposes upon him requirements which go beyond the restrictions necessarystrictly necessary, adequate and proportionate in a democratic society and which are likely to have a substantialn adverse effect on the guarantees provided by the applicable data protection law and the standard contractual clauses, or because continuing transfer would create an imminent risk of grave harm to the data subjects risk of mass surveillance of the data subjects without suspicion;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 241 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
41. Calls on the Commission to examine without delay the standard contractual clauses it has established in order to assess whether they provide the necessary protection as regards access to personal data transferred under the clauses for intelligence purposes and, if appropriate, to review them;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 250 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
45. Reiterates its resolution of 23 October 2013 and asks the Commission for the suspenstermination of the TFTP Agreement;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 255 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
46. Calls on the European Commission to react to concerns that three of the four major computerised reservation systems used by airlines worldwide are based in the US and that PNR data are saved in cloud systems operating on US soil under US law, which lacks data protection adequacy; states that this undermines the legitimacy and effectiveness of the PNR agreement; calls for termination of the EU US PNR agreement;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 269 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
52. Stresses that both the Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Directive are necessary to protect the fundamental rights of individuals and therefore must be treated as a package to be adopted simultaneously, in order to ensure that all data-processing activities in the EU provide a high level of protection in all circumstances; stresses that it will only adopt further law enforcement cooperation measures once Council has entered into negotiations with Parliament and Commission on the Data Protection Package;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 274 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
53. Notes that trust in US cloud computing and cloud providers has been negatively affected by the abovementioned practices; emphasises, therefore, the development of European clouds and IT solutions as an essential element for growth and employment and trust in cloud computing services and providers and for ensuring a high level of personal data protection;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 279 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
55. RegDeplorets the fact that such access is usually attained by means of direct enforcement by third-country authorities of their own legal rules, without recourse to international instruments established for legal cooperation such as mutual legal assistance (MLA) agreements or other forms of judicial cooperation;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 280 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
56. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to speed up the work of establishing a European Cloud Partnership while fully including civil society and the technical community, such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and incorporating data protection aspects;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 289 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
58. Recognises that the EU and the US are pursuing negotiations for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, which is of major strategic importance for creating further economic growth and for the ability of both the EU and the US to set future global regulatory standards;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 292 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
59. Strongly emphasises, given the importance of the digital economy in the relationship and in the cause of rebuilding EU-US trust, that the European Parliament will only consent tosee to it that the final TTIP agreement provided the agreement, among other criteria, fully respects fundamental rights recognised by the EU Charter, and that the protection of the privacy of individuals in relation to the processing and dissemination of personal data must continue to be governed by Article XIV of the GATSshall remain governed by Article XIV of the GATS before consenting to it; stresses that EU data protection legislation cannot be deemed an "arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination" in the application of Article XIV of the GATS; stresses furthermore that the European Parliament shall not consent to any final TTIP agreement as long as the blanket mass surveillance activities and bulk processing of personal data as well as the interception of communications in EU institutions and diplomatic representations are not fully stopped;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 311 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
62. Calls forDecides the setting up of a hHigh-l Level gGroup in order to strengthen cooperationparliamentary oversight in the field of intelligence at EU level, combined with a proper oversight mechanism ensuring both democratic legitimacy and adequate technical capacity; stresses that the high- level group should cooperate closely with national parliaments in order to propose further steps to be taken for increased oversight collaboration in the EU;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 322 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
66. Intends to organise a conference with national oversight bodies, whether parliamentary or independent, byefore the end of 2014;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 326 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
68. Calls on the Member States to develop cooperation among oversight bodies, in particular within the European Network of National Intelligence Reviewers (ENNIR); calls particularly on the oversight bodies of those Member States whose governments have refused to cooperate with the EP inquiry - UK, France, Germany, Netherlands, Poland, Sweden – to further coordinate their activities;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 329 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69
69. Urges the Commission to present, by September 2014, a proposal for a legal basis for the activities of the EU Intelligence Analysis Centre (IntCen), as well as a proper oversight mechanism adapted to its activities, including regular reporting to the European Parliament; decides not to allocate funding to IntCen until its activities are covered by a proper legal basis;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 335 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
72. Calls on the Europol Joint Supervisory Body, together with national data protection authorities, to conduct a joint inspection before the end of 2014 in order to ascertain whether information and personal data shared with Europol has been lawfully acquired by national authorities, particularly if the information or data was initially acquired by intelligence services in the EU or a third country, and whether appropriate measures are in place to prevent the use and further dissemination of such information or data; considers that Europol should not process any information or data which was obtained in violation of fundamental rights which would be protected under the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 348 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75
75. Considers that the detention of Mr Miranda and the seizure of the material in his possession under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (and also the request to The Guardian to destroy or hand over the material) by UK authorities constitutes an interference with the right of freedom of expression as recognised by Article 10 of the ECHR and Article 11 of the EU Charter;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 353 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76 a (new)
Professional Secrecy and Confidentiality Privilege 76a. Considers that it is of the essence of professional secrecy privilege for lawyers, journalists, priests and other regulated professions that their members are told by their clients, patients or sources about matters which they would not tell to others and that without the certainty of confidentiality, there can be no trust; stresses that if the right of EU citizens to be protected against any divulging of communications with their lawyers is denied, they may be denied access to legal advice and to justice; stresses that if the right of journalists to protect their sources against any divulging of communications is denied, the critical role of investigative journalism for democracy is undermined;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 365 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
78. Takes the view that the mass surveillance revelations that have initiated this crisis can be used as an opportunity for Europe to take the initiative and build up an autonomous IT key-resource capability for the mid term; underlines that in order to gain trust, such a European IT capability must be based on open standards and free and open software and if possible hardware, making the whole stack from processor design to the application layer reviewable by every interested party; points out that in order to re-gain competitiveness in the strategic sector of IT services, a digital new deal is needed with joint and large-scale efforts by EU institutions, member state governments, research institutions, industry and civil society; calls on the Commission and the Member States to use public procurement as leverage to support such resource capability in the EU by making EU security and privacy standards a key requirement in the public procurement of IT goods and services;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 367 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
79. Is highly concerned by indications that foreignStrongly condemns that that intelligence services sought to lower IT security standards and to install backdoors in a broad range of IT systems; asks the Commission to present draft legislation to ban the use of backdoors by law enforcement agencies;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 373 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
81. Calls on the Commission, standardisation bodies and ENISA to develop, by September 2014, minimum security and privacy standards and guidelines for IT systems, networks and services, including cloud computing services, in order to better protect EU citizens' personal data; believes that such standards should be set in an open and democratic process, not driven by a single country, entity or multinational company; takes the view that, while legitimate law enforcement and intelligence concerns need to be taken into account in order to support the fight against terrorism, they should not lead to a general undermining of the dependability of all IT systemsexpresses support for the recent decisions by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) to include governments in the threat model for internet security;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 376 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
82. Points out that both telecom companies and the EU and national telecom regulators have clearly neglected the IT security of their users and clients; calls on the Commission to make full use of its existing powers under the ePrivacy and Telecommunication Framework Directive to strengthen the protection of confidentiality of communication by adopting measures to ensure that terminal equipment is compatible with the right of users to control and protect their personal data, and to ensure a high level of security of telecommunication networks and services, including by way of requiring state-of-the-art end-to-end encryption of communications;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 380 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
83. Supports the EU cyber strategy but considers that it does not cover all possible threats and should be extended to cover malicious state behaviours; underlines the need for more robust IT security and resilience of IT systems;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 387 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 85
85. Calls on the Commission, in the framework of the next Work Programme of the Horizon 2020 Programme, to assess whether more resources should be directed towards boosting European research, development, innovation and training in the field of IT technologies, in particular privacy-enhancing technologies and infrastructures, cryptology, secure computing, open-source security solutions and the Information Society; stresses that no EU funding should be spent for the sole purpose of breaking into IT systems or developing tools for this;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 401 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
87. Deems it necessary for the EU to be supported byAsks the Commission to also consider the possible additional need for an EU IT Academy that brings together the best European experts in all related fields, tasked with providing all relevant EU Institutions and bodies with scientific advice on IT technologies, including security-related strategies; as a first step asks the Commission to set up an independent scientific expert panel;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 414 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 – point 5
· the use of more free and open-source systems and fewer off-the-shelf commercial systems;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 418 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 – point 10
· the use of cloud storage by the EP, including what kind of data is stored on the cloud, how the content and access to it is protected and where the cloud is located, clarifying the applicable data protection and intelligence legal regimes;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 420 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 – point 13
· an analysis of the benefits of plan for using the GNU Privacy Guard as a default encryption standard for emails which would at the same time allow for the use of digital signatures;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 428 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
93. Calls on standards bodies such as the IETF for the overall architecture of the internet in terms of data flows and storage to be reconsidered, striving for more data minimisation and transparency and less centralised mass storage of raw data, as well as avoiding unnecessaryfull end-to-end encryption of all internet traffic so that the routing of traffic through the territory of countries that do not meet basic standards on fundamental rights, data protection and privacy does not create a risk;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 430 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
94. Calls on the Member States, in cooperation with ENISA, Europol's CyberCrime Centre, CERTs and national data protection authorities and cybercrime units, to start an education and awareness- raising campaign in order to enable citizens to make a more informed choice regarding what personal data to put on line and how better to protect them, including through ‘digital hygiene’, encryption and safe cloud computing, making full use of the public interest information platform provided for in the Universal Service Directive;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 436 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95
95. Calls on the Commission, by September 2014, to evaluate the possibilities ofpropose draft legislation encouraging software and hardware manufacturers to introduce more security and privacy throughby design and by default features in their products, including the possibilit by of introducing legal liability on the part of manufacturers for unpatched known vulnerabilities, faulty or insecure software, or the installation of secret backdoors, and disincentives for the undue and disproportionate collection of mass personal data, and if appropriate to come forward with legislative proposals;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 438 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 96
96. Believes, beyond the need for legislative change, that the inquiry has shown the need for the US to restore trust with its partners, as US intelligence agencies' activities are primarily at stake;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 444 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101
101. Is ready actively to engage in a dialogue with US counterparts so that, in the ongoing American public and congressional debate on reforming surveillance and reviewing intelligence oversight, the privacy rights of EU citizens are addressed, equal information rights and privacy protection in US courts guaranteed and the current discrimination not perpetuated; urges the US to enact a general data protection law and amend the Privacy Act to create legal redress options for non-US persons;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 447 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102
102. Insists that necessary reforms be undertaken and effective guarantees given to Europeans to ensure that the use of surveillance and data processing for foreign intelligence purposes is limited by clearly specified conditions and related to reasonable suspicion or probable cause of terrorist or criminal activity; stresses that this purpose must be subject to transparent judicial oversight;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 451 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103
103. Considers that clear political signals are needed from our American partners to demonstrate that the US distinguishes between allies and adversaries; considers the actions taken and announcements by the US government so far as insufficient;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 456 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 107
107. Also believes that that the involvement and activities of EU Members States has led to a loss of trust; is of the opinion that only full clarity as to purposes and means of surveillance, public debate and, ultimately, revision of legislation, including a and practices to end mass surveillance activities and strengthening of the system of judicial and parliamentary oversight, will be able to re-establish the trust lost;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 461 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108
108. Is aware that some EU Member States are pursuing bilateral communication with the US authorities on spying allegations, and that some of them have concluded (United Kingdom) or envisage concluding (Germany, France) so-called 'anti-spying' arrangements; underlines that these Member States need to observe fully the interests of the EU as a whole; doubts the relevance of such agreements in the light of revelations that even members of the "Five Eyes" spy on each other;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 465 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108 a (new)
108a. Asks the Council to inform Parliament about discussions by Member States on an EU-wide mutual no-spy arrangement;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 466 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 109
109. Considers that such arrangements should not breach European Treaties, especially the principle of sincere cooperation (under Article 4 paragraph 3 TEU), or undermine EU policies in general and, more specifically, the internal market, fair competition and economic, industrial and social development; decides to review any such arrangements for their compatibility with European law and reserves its right to activate Treaty procedures in the event of such arrangements being proved to contradict the Union's cohesion or the fundamental principles on which it is based;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 481 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 36
Priority Plan: A European Digital Habeas CorpusDeclaration of Independence
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 485 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 114 – introductory part
114. Decides to launch A European Digital Habeas CorpusDeclaration of Independence for protecting privacy based on the following 7 actions with a European Parliament watchdog:
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 505 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 114 – point 6
Action 6: Develop a European strategy for IT independence (a "digital new deal" including the allocation of adequate resources at national and EU level);
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 510 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115
115. Calls on the EU Institutions and the Member States to support and promote the European Digital Habeas CorpusDeclaration of Independence; undertakes to act as the EU citizens' rights watchdog, with the following timetable to monitor implementation:
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 517 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115 – point 3
· Spring 2014: a formal call on the European Council to include the European Digital Habeas CorpusDeclaration of Independence in the guidelines to be adopted under Article 68 TFEU;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 519 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115 – point 4
Autumn 2014: a commitment that the European Digital Habeas CorpusDeclaration of Independence and related recommendations will serve as key criteria for the approval of the next Commission;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 521 #

2013/2188(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115 – point 7
20154: a conference bringing together high- level European experts in the various fields conducive to IT security (including mathematics, cryptography and privacy- enhancing technologies) to help foster an EU IT strategy for the next legislature;
2014/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2013/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 38 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 11 September 2012 on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA: follow-up of the European Parliament TDIP Committee report (P7_TA(2012)0309) and its follow-up resolution of 10 October 2013 (P7_TA(2013)0418,
2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 242 #

2013/2078(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Calls EU Member States and the Council to accelerate the works of the task force for the Mediterranean to ensure a significant expansion of rescue capacity at sea and to launch a comprehensive plan on migration and asylum, based on solidarity and responsibility sharing, focusing on all relevant aspects such as the revision of EU and Member States laws allowing the criminalization of humanitarian assistance to persons in distress at sea, the development of safe and legal routes for refugees and migrants to Europe as well as development, cooperation with third countries to strengthen democracy, fundamental rights and the rule of law to ensure that tragedies such as those of Lampedusa don't take place anymore;
2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2013/2024(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18 b. Considers that a proper accountability process is crucial to protect and promote human rights effectively in the EU's internal and external policies and to ensure legitimate and effective security policies based on the rule of law; calls on the Commission to propose an accountability mechanism aimed at strengthening the EU and Member States' capacity to prevent, investigate and redress human rights violations at EU level, notably those committed in the context of the CIA programme
2013/09/10
Committee: JURILIBEAFCO
Amendment 45 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) In order to make the Union more attractive for third-country national researchers and students, family members of researchers and students, as defined in Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, should be admitted with them. They should benefit from intra- Union mobility provisions and they should also have access to the labour market.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 46 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) Where appropriate, Member States should be encouraged to treat PhD candidates as researchers, and pupils attending secondary school for vocational training as students.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 53 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Admission may be refused on duly justified grounds. In particular, admission could be refused if a Member State considers, based on an assessment of the facts, in an individual case, that the third- country national concerned is a potential threat to public policy, or public security or public health.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
(33) In order to allow third-country national students to better cover part of the cost of their studies, they should be given increased access to the labour market under the conditions set out in this Directive, meaning a minimum of 20 hours per week. The principle of access for students to the labour market should be a general rule. However, in exceptional circumstances Member States should be able to take into account the situation of their national labour markets, although this must not risk entirely negatinge the right to work.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 66 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point g
(g) ‘volunteer’ means a third-country national admitted to the territory of a Member State to participate in a recognised voluntary service scheme, carrying out activities which are undertaken voluntarily on the basis of that person's own free choice and motivation, and without financial gain and for a non- profit cause, which benefit the volunteers themselves, those receiving services from a volunteer association, communities and society as a whole;
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point g a (new)
(ga) 'volunteering provider' means an organisation responsible for the voluntary service scheme to which the third-country national is assigned. Such organisations and groups are independent and self- governing as other non-profit entities, such as public authorities. They are active in the public arena and their activity is aimed at least in part, at contributing to the public good1. __________________ 1 Communication from the Commission on Promoting the Role of Voluntary Organisations and Foundations in Europe, COM(1997)0241.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 69 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point l a (new)
(la) 'host entity' means the educational establishment, research organisation, enterprise or vocational training establishment, organisation operating pupil exchanges or organisation responsible for the voluntary service scheme to which the third-country national is assigned, regardless of its legal form, established in accordance with national law in the territory of a Member State;
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Once all the general and specific conditions for admission are fulfilled, applicants shall be entitled to a long-stay visa and/or residence permit, where appropriate, to a residence permit which shall have the same validity period and allow them the possibility of a multiple entry visa. If a Member State issues residence permits only on its territory and not elsewhere and all the admission conditions laid down in this Directive are fulfilled, the Member State concerned shall issue the third- country national the requisite visa.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) provide the evidence requested by the Member State that during his/her stay he/she will have sufficient resources to cover his/her subsistence, training and return travel costs, without prejudice to an individual examination of each case. The provision of such evidence shall not be necessary if the third-country national concerned is in receipt of a grant or scholarship, if she/he has received a firm offer of work or an undertaking of sponsorship from a host family, from an organisation operating pupil exchanges or from a volunteering provider;
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 76 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. Member States may acceptshall examine, in accordance with their national legislation, an application submitted when the third- country national concerned is already in their territory.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 81 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) prove, if the Member State so requires, that they have previous relevant education or qualifications or professional experience to benefit from the work experience.deleted
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – point a
(a) be at least 17 but not more than 30 or, except in individually justified cases, more than 30 years of age;deleted
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1 a (new)
After successful authorisation and grant of a visa, the host entity shall be registered in an accreditation system, in order to facilitate future application procedures.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 89 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall issue an authorisation for students for a period of at least one year andt least the full period of study and where appropriate shall renew it if the conditions laid down in Articles 6 and 10 are still met. If the period of studies is scheduled to last less than one year, the authorisation shall be issued for the duration of the studies.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. For school pupils and au pairs, Member States shall issue an authorisation for a maximum period of one yeat least the period of the pupil exchange scheme or for at least the period of the agreement between the host family and the au pair.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 93 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay reject an application in the following cases:
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) where the host entity or educational establishment was established in the sole purpose of facilitating entry;deleted
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shallmay withdraw an authorisation in the following cases:
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 96 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) where the host entity was established for the sole purpose of facilitating entry;deleted
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 98 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) for students, where the time limits imposed on access to economic activities under Article 23 are not respected or if the respective student does not make acceptable progress in the relevant studies in accordance with national legislation or administrative practice.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 99 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) for students, where they do not make acceptable progress in the relevant studies in accordance with national law. The Member State concerned may withdraw an authorisation on those grounds only with the prior consent of the educational establishment concerned.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 100 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may withdraw an authorisation for reasons of public policy, or public security or public health.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. When a Member State withdraws an authorisation on one of the grounds set out in points (d) or (e)of paragraph 1, the third-country national concerned shall be entitled to stay on the territory of that Member State if he/she finds another host entity or host family in order to finish his/her studies or research or for another purpose for which the authorisation was granted.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) for students, where the time limits imposed on access to economic activities under Article 23 are not respected or where the student does not make acceptable progress in the relevant studies in accordance with national legislation or administrative practice.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 104 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) for students, where they do not make acceptable progress in the relevant studies in accordance with national law. The Member State concerned may refuse to renew an authorisation on those grounds only with the prior consent of the educational establishment concerned.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 112 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 24
After finalisation of research or studies in the Member State, third-country nationals shall be entitled to stay on the territory of the Member StateEuropean Union for a period of 128 months in order to look for work or set up a business , if the conditions laid down in points (a) and (c) to (f) of Article 6 are still fulfilled. In a period of more than 3 and less than 6 months, third-country nationals may be requested to provide evidence that they continue to seek employment or are in the process of setting up a business. After a period of 612 months, third-country nationals may additionally be requested to provide evidence that they have a genuine chance of being engaged or of launching a business.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 114 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – title
Researchers' and students' family members
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 115 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 3(1) and Article 8 of Directive 2003/86/EC, family reunification shall not be made dependent on the holder of the authorisation to stay for the purposes of research or studies having reasonable prospects of obtaining the right of permanent residence and having a minimum period of residence.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 116 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of Article 5(4) of Directive 2003/86/EC, authorisations for family members shall be granted, where the conditions for family reunification are fulfilled, within 90 days from the date on which the application was lodged, and 60 days from the date of the initial application for family members of third-country national researchers and students covered by the relevant Union programmes including mobility measures.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 117 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. By way of derogation from Article 13(2) and (3) of Directive 2003/86/EC, the duration of validity of the authorisation of family members shall be the same as that of the authorisation granted to the researcher or the student insofar as the period of validity of their travel documents allows it.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 121 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – title
Right to mobility between Member States for researchers, students and remunerated trainees
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 126 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For periods exceeding three months, but not exceeding six months, a third-country national who has been admitted as a student, school pupil, volunteer, au-pair or as an unremunerated or as a remunerated trainee under this Directive shall be allowed to carry out part of his/her studies/traineeship/volunteer activity in another Member State provided that before his or her transfer to that Member State, he/she has submitted the following to the competent authority of the second Member State:
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 130 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 3
3. For the mobility of students an, school pupils, au-pairs, volunteers and unremunerated or remunerated trainees from the first Member State to a second Member State, the authorities of the second Member State shall inform the authorities of the first Member State on their decision. The cooperation procedures set out in Article 32 shall apply.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 133 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – title
Rights for researchers, school pupils, volunteers, unremunerated and remunerated trainees and students covered by Union programmes including mobility measures
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 136 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall grant third-country nationals, who have been admitted as researchers, school pupils, volunteers, unremunerated or remunerated trainees or students under this Directive and who are covered by Union programmes including mobility measures, an authorization covering the whole duration of their stay in the Member States concerned where:
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 139 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the full list of Member States that the researcher, school pupil, volunteer, unremunerated or remunerated trainee or student intends to go to is known prior to entry to the first Member State;
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) in the case of students, the applicant can provide evidence of acceptance by the relevant educational establishment of higher education to follow a course of study.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 146 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) in the case of volunteers, the applicant can provide evidence of acceptance by the relevant volunteering provider organisation or programme, such as the European Voluntary Service.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. The authorisation shall be granted by the first Member State that the researcher, school pupil, volunteer, unremunerated or remunerated trainee or student resides in.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 152 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authorities of the Member States shall decide on the complete application for an authorisation and shall notify the applicant in writing, in accordance with the notification procedures laid down in the national law of the Member State concerned, including on any appeal lodged against decisions rejecting an application for an authorisation as soon as possible and at the latest within 630 days from the date on which the application was lodged, and within 30 days in the case of third-country national researchers and students covered by Union programmes including mobility measuresor the appeal was lodged.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 154 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. If the information supplied in support of the application is inadequate, the competent authorities shall inform the applicant of any further information they need and, when registering the application, indicate a reasonable deadline to complete the application. The period referred to in paragraph 1 shall be suspended until the authorities have received the additional information required.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #

2013/0081(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 31
Member States may require applicants to pay fees for the processing of applications in accordance with this Directive. The amountlevel of such fees shall not endangbe excessive or disproportionate. Where those fulfilment of its objectiveees are paid by the third-country national remunerated trainee or au-pair, that third-country national shall be entitled to be reimbursed by the host entity or the host family respectively. The fees concerned shall be waived in the case of non-remunerated trainees and volunteers.
2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 50 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 19
– having regard to Turkey's potential to play a pivotal role in diversifying energy resources and routes for oil and gas, gas and electricity transit from neighbouring countries to the EU; having regard to the potential for both Turkey and the EU to benefit from Turkey's rich renewable energy resources in creating a sustainable low-carbon economy,
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 69 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Commends the Commission and Turkey for the implementation of the positive agenda, which proves how, in a context of mutual engagement and clear objectives, Turkey and the EU could advance their dialogue, achieve common understanding and produce positive change; believes that a renewed mutual engagement in the context of the negotiation process is needed to maintain a constructive relationship; stresses the importance of creating the conditions for a constructive dialogue and the foundations for a common understandingBelieves that a renewed mutual engagement in the context of the negotiation process is needed to maintain a constructive relationship; stresses the importance of creating the conditions for a constructive dialogue and the foundations for a common understanding; commends the Commission and Turkey for the implementation of the positive agenda, which proves how, in a context of mutual engagement and clear objectives, Turkey and the EU could advance their dialogue, achieve common understanding and produce positive change;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 88 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses Turkey's strategic role, politically and geographically, for the foreign policy of the EU and its neighbourhood policy; recognises Turkey's role as an important regional player and calls on the EU and Turkey to further reinforce their existing political dialogue on foreign policy choices and objectives; regrets that the alignment of Turkey with CFSP declarations continued to be low in 2012; encourages Turkey to develop its foreign policy in the framework of dialogue and coordination with the EU; asks the Member states to open the Chapter on External Relation (30) for closer coordination of Turkey with CFSP;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 92 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2a (new)
2a. Deeply regrets Turkey's decision to abstain from meetings and contacts with the Presidency of the European Union during the second half of 2012; recalls that the Presidency of the Council of the European Union is provided for in the Treaty on European Union and that Turkey, as a candidate country, must commit to serene relations with the European Union and all its Member States; notes with disappointment that the Turkish insistence not to accept a representative of the Cypriot Presidency has led to the cancellation of the 70th EU- Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 105 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Council decision to invite the Commission to take steps towards visa liberalisation as a gradual and long term perspective, in parallel with the signature of the readmission agreement; urges Turkey to sign and implement the readmission agreement without further delay and to ensure that, until this agreement enters into force, existing bilateral agreements are fully implemented; recalls that Turkey is one of the key transit countries for illegalrregular migration to the EU and underlines the need to intensify cooperation with the EU on migration management, the fight against human trafficking and border controls; stresses once again the importance of facilitating access to the EU for business people, academics, students and representatives of civil society from Turkey; supports the efforts of the Commission and the Member States to implement the visa code, harmonise and simplify visa requirements and create visa facilitating centres in Turkey; Reminds the Member States of their commitmentobligations under the association agreement in line with the Soysal Ruling of the European Court of Justice of 19 February 2009;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 108 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3a (new)
3a. Is concerned by the continued arbitrary refusal of access to the asylum procedure and the practice of repatriation of refugees, asylum-seekers and other people who may be in need of protection; urges the government to bring into line with international standards detention regulations found to be unlawful by the ECtHR in the case of Abdolkhani and Karimina vs. Turkey; calls on the Turkish Grand National Assembly to adopt a comprehensive law consistent with international standards on protection and reception to protect the rights of all refugees, asylum-seekers and other people who may be in need of protection, without discrimination within Turkey's jurisdiction;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 117 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Commends the Constitution Conciliation Committee for its commitment to a new Constitution and for the inclusive process of consultation of civil society, which reflected the diversity of Turkish society; encourages the Committee to continue its work and to tackle in a collegial way, and in line with the values of the EU, key issues such as (i) the separation of power and an adequate system of checks and balances, (ii) relations between the State, society and religion, (iii) an inclusive system of governance securing the basicfundamental rights of all citizens and (iv) an inclusive concept of citizenship;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 128 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Reaffirms the fundamental role of the Turkish Grand National Assembly (TGNA) as the centre of Turkey's democratic system and stresses the importance of support and commitment amongst all political parties for the reform process, in particular a valuable legal framework protecting and enhancing fundamental rights for all communitieitizens; commends the work of the Human Rights Inquiry Committee and asks for a more central role of the EU Harmonisation Committee to promote the alignment of new legislation with the acquis or with European standards during the legislative process;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 131 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the third judicial reform package as a step towards a comprehensive reform process in the area of the judiciary and fundamental rights; stresses however the crucial importance to continue the reform process with a fourth judicial reform package addressing (a) the issues related to the excessively broad definitions of criminal offences under the Criminal Law orand in particular what constitutes an act of terrorism under the Penal Code and the Anti-Terror Law, with the urgent need to introduce a clear distinction between the promotion of terrorism and the incitement to violence and the expression of non- violent ideas in line with the ECtHR case law, in order to safeguard freedom of expression, (b) the issue of the excessively long pre-trial detention periods, and (c) the need to and media, (b) procedures, including an independent and impartial interpretation of legal provisions that respect fundamental rights, such as allowing full access to the prosecution file for defence lawyers and addressing concerns regarding the quality and consistency of the evidence, c) efficiency such as the backlog of cases, which combined with procedural norms lead to issues such as the excessively long pre- trial detention periods;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 136 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the third judicial reform package as a step towards a comprehensive reform process in the area of the judiciary and fundamental rights; stresses however the crucial importance to continue the reform process with a fourth judicial reform package addressing (a) the issues related to the excessively broad definitions of criminal offences under the Criminal Law or the Anti-Terror Law, with the urgent need to introduce a clear distinction between the promotion of terrorism and the incitement to violence and the expression of non-violent ideas, in order to safeguard freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of association right of strike and collective bargaining(b) the issue of the excessively long pre-trial detention periods, and (c) the need to allow full access to the prosecution file for defence lawyers;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 138 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7a (new)
7a. Considers that the provisions contained in the Turkish anti-terror legislation and Article 220 TCC allow for a very wide margin of appreciation, in particular in cases where membership in a terrorist organisation has not been proven and when an act or statement may be deemed to coincide with "the aims" of a terrorist organisation; asks Turkish authorities to take legislative measures and reflect the case-law of the ECtHR (Güzel and Özer v. Turkey, judgment of 6 July 2010), the Recommendation 1426 (1999) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe ("European democracies facing up to terrorism"), and the Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on human rights and the fight against terrorism (11 July 2002);
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 144 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7a (new)
7a. Calls upon the Turkish government, in order to increase the efficiency of judicial proceedings and address the ongoing backlog of cases, to bring its regional courts of appeal, which were legally due to be operational by June 2007, into operation as soon as possible and to focus on training judges and prosecutors for this purpose;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 146 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7b (new)
7b. considers the verdict in the Pinar Selek case on 24 January2013 to be a obvious example of the shortcomings in Turkey's justice system and of the weakness of investigations in Turkey; considers this trial to be a test for the rule of law and the credibility of the judiciary in Turkey;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 148 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7b (new)
7b. Notes that the Ad Hoc Delegation for the Observation of the Trials of Journalists in Turkey will continue to monitor the trial of journalists and will follow judicial reforms in Turkey addressing freedom of expression and media;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 153 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8a (new)
8a. Underlines the importance of providing effective protection for human- rights defenders; expresses concern about continuing court cases against human- rights defenders and their continued prosecution; in this respect, draws particular attention to the trial of the writer, sociologist and feminist Pinar Selek, which has lasted almost 15 years and, despite three acquittal decisions, resulted in a life sentence pronounced on 24 January 2013; strongly condemns this decision, pointing out that the long duration of the court case raises questions as regards the right to liberty and security, as well as the right to a fair trial, enshrined respectively in Articles 5 and 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 162 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that freedom of expression and media pluralism are core European values and that a truly democratic society requires true freedom of expression, including the right of dissent; underlines the importance of abolishing legislation providing for disproportionately high tax fines on the media, leading in some cases to their closure or to self-censorship, and the urgent need to reform the internet law;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 164 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that freedom of expression and media pluralism are core European values and that a truly democratic society requires true freedom of expression, including the right of dissent; underlines the importance of abolishing legislation providing for disproportionately high fines on the media, leading in some cases to their closure or to self-censorship, and the urgent need to reform the internet law; regrets that a number of laws such as Articles 301- 318- 220/6 in combination with 314/2 , Articles 285 and 288 of the penal code, Articles 6 and 7/2 of the anti terror law and law 5651/2007 on the internet continue to limit freedom of expression; reiterates its previous calls to the government to finalise the review of the legal framework on freedom of expression and to bring it, without delay, in line with the ECHR and the ECtHR case law; deplores thus unlawful prosecutions of journalists, writers, publishers, academics, human rights defenders, peaceful demonstrators and activists, officials of Kurdish political parties and associations;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 189 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Welcomes the Law on the Ombudsman and the appointment of a first Head Ombudsman, who shall ensure the credibility of this institution through his decisions; stresses that the establishment of the Ombudsman is an important step in safeguarding the rights of citizens and ensuring accountability of the public administration; calls on the board of the Ombudsman that the regulation on the internal decision-making process guarantees the independence of the institution;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 196 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that, in the ‘sledgehammer’ trial a first instance court sentenced 324 suspects to 13-20 years; stresses that investigations on KCK and of alleged coup plans, such as the ‘Ergenekon’ and ‘Sledgehammer’ cases, must demonstrate the strength and the proper, independent, impartial and transparent functioning of Turkish democratic institutions and the judiciary, and their firm, unconditional commitment to respect for fundamental rights; is concerned about the allegations regarding the use of inconsistent evidence; regrets that these cases have been overshadowed by concerns about their wide scope and the shortcomings in the proceedings;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 206 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the Law on the protection of family and prevention of violence against women; commends the National Action Plan to combat Violence against Women (2012-2015) and stresses the need to enforce it effectively nationwide; calls on the Ministry for Family and Social Policies to continue its efforts to increase the number and quality of shelters for women and minors in danger; stresses the importance to provide women who have been victims of violence with concrete alternatives and self-sustainment prospects; urgecommends Turkey to continue to step up its preventive's efforts at all levels in the fight against ‘honour killings’, domestic violence and the phenomenon of forced marriages and child brides; calls on the Ministry to continue to actively promote women's participation in the labour market, which remains low, in politics and at senior level in the administration and the private sector, if necessary by foreseeing reserved quotas and by reviewing some special laws regulating employment in Turkey;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 217 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses the urgent need for comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation and the establishment of an anti- discrimination and equality board to protect individuals against discrimination based on ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or sexual identity; calls on Turkey to adopt an action plan to promote the full equality of rights and full acceptance of LGBT persons; stresses the urgent need for comprehensive antidiscrimination legislation and the establishment of an antidiscrimination and equality board to protect individuals against discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic, features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation or sexual identity; calls on Turkey to adopt an action plan to promote the full equality of rights and full acceptance of LGBT persons;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 236 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes the continued implementation of legislation amending the 2008 law on foundations and broadening the scope of the restoration of the property rights of non-Muslim communities; calls on the relevant authorities to assist the Syriac community in clarifying the difficulties faced with property and land registration; calls for a solution for the large number of properties of the Latin Catholic Church which remain confiscated by the State; recalls the urgent need to continue vital and substantial reform in the area of freedom of thought, conscience and religion, in particular by enabling religious communities to obtain legal personality, by eliminating all restrictions on the training, appointment and succession of clergy, by recognising Alevi places of worships and by complying with the relevant judgments of the ECtHR and the recommendations of the Venice Commission; calls on Turkey to ensure that the Saint Gabriel monastery is not deprived of its lands, and that it is protected in its entirety; welcomes the initiatives to reopen the Greek School of Büyükada as a international centre of cultures and asks Turkish Government to reopen Halki Seminars;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 241 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17a (new)
17a. Supports strongly the ongoing negotiations for a peaceful solution of the Kurdish question and asks all political parties in Turkey to support this process and share their responsibility for its success; convinced that a successful dialogue on this question will have a positive impact in the Middle East and open new opportunities for the resolution of regional conflicts;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 249 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that Turkey continued to demonstrate resilience at the terrorist attacks by the PKK; cCalls on Turkey to invest renewed efforts towards a political solution to the Kurdish issue; asks all political forces to ensure an adequate political platform and to debate in a constructive way the Kurdish issue and to facilitate a real opening to the claims for basic rights in the Constitutional process; asks all political forces to work in alliance towards the goal of reinforced political dialogue and a process of further political, cultural and socio-economic inclusion and participation of citizens of Kurdish origin, in order to guarantee the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly and promote the peaceful inclusion of citizens of Kurdish origin into Turkish society; welcomes the new legislation to open the possibility to use the native language in trials, considers in this context the right to education in the native language and the right to use Kurdish in local administrative communications as essential; recalls that a political solution can only be built upon a truly democratic debate on the Kurdish issue and expresses concern at the large number of cases launched against writers and journalists writing on the Kurdish issue and the arrest of several Kurdish politicians, mayors and members of municipal councils, trade unionists, lawyers, protestors and human rights defenders in connection with the KCK trial; underlines the importance of promoting a discussion of the Kurdish issue within the democratic institutions, particularly the TGNA;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 265 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19a (new)
19a. Welcomes the verdict of the Higher Administrative Court (Danistay) on the annulment of the permit to construct the Ilisu Dam, based on environmental impact studies and based on applicable law; calls on the Turkish Government to preserve this archaeological and environmental heritage by prioritizing smaller, ecologically and socially sustainable projects; and asks the EU institutions and EU member states to make full use of all EU instruments of the negotiations on the Chapter Environment (27) and of enlargement policy for candidate countries in this respect;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 266 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19b (new)
19b. Calls on Turkey and the Commission to take Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 on the trade in seal products (so- called 'Seal Regulation') in consideration during the negotiation on the Chapter Environment (27) opened in December 2009, banning the marketing of products derived from seals; urges the Turkish Government to align its policy with the EU Regulation prohibiting the trade of all products from commercial seal hunts and in so doing to strongly contribute to ending the largest commercial hunt of a marine mammal in the world;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 287 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Deeply regrets Turkey's decision to abstain from meetings and contacts with the Cypriot Presidency of the Council of the EU and tTakes the view that Turkey missed an important opportunity to start a process of engagement and normalisation of relations with Cyprus, with the occasion of its Presidency of the Council of the European Union; recalls that the EU is based on the principles of sincere cooperation and mutual solidarity amongst all its Member States and respect for the institutional framework; stresses that progress towards the normalisation of Turkey's relations with the Republic of Cyprus is urgently needed in order to provide new momentum to the EU- Turkey accession negotiations;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 292 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Deeply regrets Turkey's decision to abstain from meetings and contacts with the Cypriot Presidency of the Council of the EU and takes the view thatasks all parties concerned and Turkey not to missed an important opportunity to start a process of engagement and normalisation of relations with Cyprus; recalls that the EU is based on the principles of sincere cooperation and mutual solidarity amongst all its Member States and respect for the institutional framework;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 310 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Expresses once again its strong support to the reunification of Cyprus, based on a fair and viable settlement for both communities; underlines the urgency of an agreement between the two communities on how to proceed with the substantive settlement negotiations, so that the negotiating process, under the auspices of the UN Secretary-General, can soon regain momentum; calls on Turkey to begin withdrawing its forces from Cyprus and transfer Famagusta to the UN in accordance with UNSC Resolution 550 (1984); calls, in parallel, on the Republic of Cyprus to open the port of Famagusta under EU customs supervision in order to promote a positive climate for the successful solution of the ongoing reunification negotiations and allow Turkish Cypriots to trade directly in a legal manner that is acceptable to all; is convinced that the adaption of the Direct Trade Regulation and the application of the Additional Protocol to the EC-Turkey Association Agreement (Ankara Protocol) will have a positive economic impact on both communities in Cyprus;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 319 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23a (new)
23a. Asks the President to invite two observers representing the Cypriot Turkish community to the Parliament, following the decision of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in this respect;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 332 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Encourages Turkeyall parties concerned to intensify itstheir support for the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 386 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Reiterates its condemnation, in the strongest terms, of the continuing terrorist violence by the PKK, which is on the EU list of terrorist organisations, and expresses its full solidarity to Turkey and to the families of the many victims; calls on the Member States, in close coordination with the EU counter terrorism coordinator and Europol, to intensify cooperation with Turkey in the fight against terrorism and organised crime as a source of financing of terrorism; calls on Turkey to adopt a data protection law and legislation on the financing of terrorism so that a cooperation agreement can be concluded with Europol and judicial cooperation with Eurojust and with the EU Member States can further develop; takes the view that the assignment of a police liaison officer to Europol would help improve bilateral cooperation;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 402 #

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
29. Welcomes the decision to enhance cooperation between the EU and Turkey on a number of important energy issues and calls onencourages Turkey to commintinue its commitment to this cooperation; believes that, in view of Turkey's strategic role, initialwelcomes the meeting of the steering group in Ankara on 14 February 2013; believes that, in view of Turkey's strategic role and plentiful wind, solar and geothermal energy resources, consideration should be given to the value of opening negotiations on Chapter 15 on energy with a view to furthering the EU-Turkey strategic dialogue on energy; considers that both the enhanced EU- Turkey energy cooperation and any eventual negotiations on Chapter 15 should encourage the development of renewable energy potential and cross- border electricity transmission infrastructure;
2013/02/12
Committee: AFET
Amendment 1 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to the decisions and case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights,
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 4 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA,
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 6 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
- having regard to Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third- country nationals,
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 7 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 b (new)
- having regard to Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification,
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 c (new)
- having regard to the Commission communication to the European Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Evaluation of EU Readmission Agreements’ (COM(2011) 76 final),
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 d (new)
- having regard to Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on Community statistics on migration and international protection,
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 11 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14
– having regard to international instruments concerning the rights of children, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, especially Article 3 thereof and the general comments, in particular that on the treatment of unaccompanied and separated children outside their country of origin (No 6),
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that an unaccompanied minor is above all a minorchild who is potentially in danger and that child protection, rather than immigration control, must be the major consideration for States and the European Union when dealing with them; insists that the Member States comply to the letter with the international and European obligations which apply when a child is under their jurisdiction and which cannot be made subject to arbitrary restrictions, such as a stipulation that they do not apply in certain areas or regions;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 37 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls also that the overriding interests of the child, as enshrined in provisions and case-law, must take priority over any other consideration in any act taken with regard to them, whether by public authorities or by private institutions; calls on the Commission to propose a common reference framework, based on a set of indices, to assess what constitutes the overriding interests of a childthe guidelines set out in General Comment No 6 on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, to assess what constitutes the overriding interests of a child; the child must therefore be granted access to the territory of the European Union so that qualified and trained professionals can carry out a comprehensive assessment of his or her circumstances, in particular his or her nationality, education, ethnic, cultural and linguistic background, degree of vulnerability and specific protection needs;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 51 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Deplores the lack of reliable official data on unaccompanied minors; calls on the Member States and the European Union to establish a coordinated method for gathering information in each Member State, by means of platforms bringing together all parties involved in the problem of unaccompanied minors, and to draw up a list of national contact points; calls on the Commission to amend Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 so that the Member States can remove data concerning unaccompanied minors from the statistics they submit;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the European Union and Member States ought to step up their cooperation with third countries of origin and transit concerning the problem of unaccompanied minors, preventing their arrival, combating trafficking, irregular immigrationcombating trafficking, restoration of family ties, return and readmission, in the context of the regular dialogues conducted between the European Union and these States and the European External Action Service (EEAS); calls for unaccompanied minors to be excluded from the scope of readmission agreements in the light of the risk of human rights violations reported in the Commission communication entitled ‘Evaluation of EU Readmission Agreements’ (COM(2011) 76);
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls that combating trafficking in human beings is a necessary first step, as minors are particularly confronted with the risks of trafficking and exploitation and because action should be taken in third countries to tackle the root causes of trafficking; points out that minors who are victims of trafficking need special protection, and calls on the Commission to monitor as closely as possible the transposition and application of Directives 2012/29/EU and 2011/36/EU; welcomes the adoption of the European strategy on the eradication of trafficking and, in particular, the provisions on funding for the drafting of guidelines on child protection systems and the development of a good practice model as regards the role of mentors and/or representatives;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to devote specific headings to unaccompanied minors in the European Asylum and Migration Fund, particularly in the sections concerning refugees, the external borders and return, and in the European Social Funthereby making it easier to afford long-term guarantees concerning the protection of children, and in the European Social Fund, in particular with a view to supporting the regions affected;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission to draw up, on the basis of these strategic guidelines, a European framework for the protection of unaccompanied minors which the Member States would use as the basis for their national strategies; calls on each Member State to designate a national contact point responsible for coordinating the drafting and implementation of the national strategy; calls on the Commission to set up a task force which would support the existing group of experts by monitoring the introduction of the European framework in the Member States and submit an annual report on that subject to the European Parliament and the Council;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that no child should be prevmay be dentied from gaining access to the territory or be sent back by means of a summaryf the European Union or be the subject of an exceptional procedure at the border of a Member State;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on Member States to comply strictly and without fail with the fundamental obligation never to place a minor in detention; calls on the Commission, in the light of the relevant case-law, to take great care when applying the provisions of EU law on the detention of minors;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 117 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Considers that each Member State has a responsibility to identify unaccompanied minors; calls on Member States to direct them immediately to specialist social and educational services which must, on the one hand, assess the individual circumstances and needs of each minor and, on the other hand, provide them with all the information they need, in a language and form they can understand; calls on the Member States to make qualified interpreters available free of charge to unaccompanied minors at every stage of their dealings with the authorities;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 119 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Member States to organise for the staff of the authorities which deal with unaccompanied minors training courses to familiarise them with the specific needs of such minors;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Deplores the unsuitable and intrusive nature of the medical techniques used to ascertain age in some Member States; recommends that the Commission establish a common method for ascertaining age, consisting of a multidisciplinary assessment performed by independent, trained practitioners, and with minors always being given the benefit of the doubt; considers that it should be possible to appeal against the results of this assessment; points out that ascertaining age must not be a systematic measure, but rather a last resort in cases where the documentary evidence provided by and the testimony of the child do not provide proof that he or she is a minor; welcomes the work of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) on this subject, which should be taken as a basis for dealing with all minors;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 149 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – indent 1
– access to appropriate accommodation: accommodation in a ‘centre’ should never be in a closed centre and, during the initial days, should be specialised in the reception of unaccompanied minors; this first phase, involving the provision of safe accommodation, should be followed by a stabilisation period during which minors are helped to become more independent; minors should always be separated from adults; accommodation with host families and in ‘living units’ should be encouraged when it is appropriate and accords with the minor's wishes;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 153 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – indent 2
– adequate material, legal and psychological provision must be made for them at every stage of their dealings with the authorities;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 157 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – indent 3
– the right to education, vocational training, and thus to work, and socio- educational advice;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 186 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Condemns the very precarious circumstances with which these minors are suddenly confronted when they reach the age of majority; calls on States to institute procedures for assisting and supporting these minors in their transition to adulthood; welcomes the work of the Council of Europe on this subject and calls on the Commission to propose common standards for the planning of ‘individualised life projects’ for, and with, the minor;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 189 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses firmly that the ultimate aim, once an unaccompanied minor has arrived in European territory, must be to seek an appropriate solution for him, which respects hisis in his overriding interests; recalls that efforts to achieve this must always begin withinclude an examination of the possibilities of family reunification, in particular in the European Union and when this poses no risk to the family; calls on the Commission, in that connection, to assess whether Article 10(3) of Directive 2003/86/EC is being implemented properly;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 199 #

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to propose a common reference framework outlining a series of conditions to be met before a minor can be returned, respecting in a manner consistent with the overriding interests of the child concerned; that framework should be based on the comparative study of best practices in the area of the return of minors published by the Commission in 2011, which contains a checklist and a compendium of good practices relating to the return of children; reiterates in the strongest terms that no decision to return a minor may be taken if it is not in his or her interests, if it endangers the minor's life, security or fundamental rights or those of his or her family, and that the individual circumstances of each minor must be taken into account; calls on Member States to establish(and of his or her family members, in the context of family reunification) must be assessed in detail; no return may be effected without the explicit consent of the minor concerned and if there is no tangible proof that he or she will be received in a manner respectful of his or her rights; calls on Member States to establish, in cooperation with international and non- governmental organisations, monitoring arrangements to ensure the protection and reintegration of minors after their return, in cooperation with countries of origin and transit; calls on the Commission, when assessing the implementation of Directive 2008/115/EC, to focus on its impact on unaccompanied minors, and in particular on the impact of Articles 10, 14(1)(c) and 17;
2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2 #

2012/2107(DEC)

Draft opinion
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to the fact that the UN "Comprehensive Settlement of the Cyprus Problem” was submitted to separate simultaneous referenda on 24 April 2004 and approved by the Turkish Cypriot electorate by a margin of two to one,
2012/11/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 5 #

2012/2107(DEC)

Draft opinion
Recital A
A. wWhereas, with a view to creating the foundations for an effective solution to the reunification of Cyprus, it is essential, inter alia, to support the process of reconciliation and confidence- building between the two Cypriot communities, to support the economic development of the Turkish Cypriot Community with a particular emphasis on the economic integration of the island, and its alignment with the acquis communautaire; whereas it is essential to bring the Turkish Cypriot Community closer to the Union,
2012/11/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2012/2107(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the importance of continuing to provide assistance to the Turkish Cypriot cCommunity according to the Council Regulation to facilitate the reunification of Cyprus;
2012/11/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 13 #

2012/2107(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Points out, in particular, the fundamental role of bi-communal projects such as the Committee on Missing Ppersons in order to determine the fate of the missing persons and so contribute to inter- communal reconciliation as well as the necessity to fund infrastructure projects and cooperate in a more efficient way with the United Nations Agencies and Programmes;
2012/11/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 18 #

2012/2107(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Asks the Commission and EUPSO to maximise the circulation of information on tenders for reconciliation and civil society strengthening programmes; encourages devolution of power as well as a better EU funding predictability through a multiannual programming framework to ensure better sustainability and efficiency of EU funded programs;
2012/11/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 22 #

2012/2107(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that an estimated 78% of privately owned land in the northern part of Cyprus legally belongs to Greek Cypriots and that a solution to the property issue will be essential for the support of future reunification plans; calls the Commission and EUPSO to continue to strengthen the system of recording and earmarking of the rights on such lands so that the legitimate owners can maintain visibility vis-á-vis third party private investors;
2012/11/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 24 #

2012/2107(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of the seawater desalination plant in the nNorthern part of the island for the preservation of the ground water reserves to alleviate the risks of drought related to the 40% decrease in annual rainfall in the past 30 years and asks the Commission to rescue this project without any discrimination based on the origin of tendersin a way to contribute to peace on the island;
2012/11/13
Committee: AFET
Amendment 156 #

2012/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Recalls Turkey's ambition to inspire and assist democratic transitions and socio- economic reforms in the southern neighbourhood; notes that participation of Turkish institutions and non-governmental organisations in ENP instruments would generate unique synergy effects, especially in areas such as institution-building and socio-economic and civil society development; believes that practical cooperation should be complemented with a structured dialogue between the EU and Turkey with a view to coordinating their respective neighbourhood policies; hopes that the conditions will improve for the opening of further chapters in the membership negotiations (e.g. ratification and implementation of the Ankara Protocol); recognises that the lack of cooperation in migration policy is having a negative impact, especially on Greece;
2012/06/26
Committee: AFET
Amendment 163 #

2012/2050(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Regrets that over the last two years no new chapters were opened for negotiations with Turkey; welcomes, in this regard, the recent launch of the positive agenda in EU and Turkey relations in order to provide new momentum to Turkey's accession process but points out that this agenda must be complementary to regular negotiations and should be aimed at overcoming the present deadlock with a view to paving the way for Turkey's EU membership once all the conditions are fulfilled;
2012/06/26
Committee: AFET
Amendment 1 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union is founded on commitment to democracy, the rule of law and, human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human rdightsnity and international law, not only in its internal policies, but also externally; whereas the EU commitment to human rights reinforced by the entry into force of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the accession process to the ECHR must be reflected into all areas of policy in order to make the EU human rights policy effective and credible;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 3 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
– having regard to the Guidelines to EU policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the EU guidelines on the death penalty,
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 4 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14
- having regard to the European Court of Human Rights applicationcases Al-Nashiri v. Poland and Abu Zubaydah v. Lithuania, Abu Zubaydah v. Lithuania, Abu Zubaydah v. Poland, and El-Masri v. "The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" - heard by the Grand Chamber on 16 May 2012,
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B
B. whereas instruments governing the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and its two Optional Protocols, and the UN Convention Against Torture (CAT), and the Optional Protocol to the CAT, which not only mandates an absolute ban on torture but also requires investigation of allegations of tortureentails a positive obligation to investigate allegations of torture and to provide remedies and reparation; whereas the EU guidelines on torture provide the framework for the EU's efforts 'to prevent and eradicate torture and ill- treatment in all parts of the world’;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 5 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)
- having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 15 October 2003 on Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union: Respect for and promotion of values on which the Union is based [COM(2003) 606 final],
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 6 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas secret detention, which constitutes enforced disappearances, may amount, if widely or systematically practiced, to a crime against humanity; whereas states of emergency and the fight against terrorism constitute an enabling environment for secret detention;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 11 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 31
- having regard to the ongoing national inquiries intovarious initiatives at national level to account for Member States' involvement in the CIA rendition and secret detention programme conducted in Poland, Denmark, Finland, the United Kingdom and Spain, and to the national inquiries into Member States’ involvement in the CIA rendition and secret detention programme that have already been conducted inter alia in Lithuania, Romania, Poland, Germany, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Denmark, Italy and Spain, including the ongoing inquiry in Denmark and past inquiries in Sweden, the ongoing criminal investigations conducted in Poland and the United Kingdom, former criminal proceedings in Italy, Germany, Lithuania, Portugal and Spain, the all-party group parliamentary investigation in the United Kingdom and former parliamentary investigations in Germany, Lithuania, Poland and Romania,
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 12 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital D a (new)
D a. whereas the US government passed, in December 2011, detention provisions in the National Defence Authorisation Act that introduce indefinite detention of persons suspected of engaging in terrorist actions within the US and undermine the right to due process and a fair trial;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 17 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 32
– having regard to the hearings of its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) held on 27 March 2012 and of its Subcommittee on Human Rights held on 12 April 2012, the LIBE delegation visit to Lithuania of 25-27 April 2012, the visit of the rapporteur to Poland on 16 May 2012 and all the written and oral contributions received by the rapporteur,
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 18 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 32 a (new)
- having regard to the joint request for flight data submitted to the Director of Eurocontrol by the Chairman of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the rapporteur on 16 April 2012 and to the comprehensive response received from Eurocontrol on 26 April 2012,
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 19 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 32 b (new)
- having regard to the DG IPOL note "The results of the inquiries into the CIA's programme of extraordinary rendition and secret prisons in European states in light of the new legal framework following the Lisbon Treaty" (PE 462456),
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates its condemnation of the practices of extraordinary rendition, secret prisons and torture, which are prohibited under domestic and international human rights law and which breach inter alia the rights to liberty, security, humane treatment, freedom from torture, presumption of innocence, fair trial, legal counsel and equal protection under the law; reaffirms in this respect that the use of unreliable and unenforceable diplomatic assurances to send foreigners alleged to be threats to national security to countries where they are at risk of torture or other ill-treatment contradicts states' obligations in this regard, and calls on the Council and EU Member States to ban this practice;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 33 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Reiterates that full application of the human rights clause of agreements is fundamental in the relations between the European Union and its Member States and third countries and considers that there is a real momentum to revisit how European governments have cooperated with the apparatus of repression of dictatorships in the name of countering terrorism; considers in this respect that the newly revised European Neighbourhood Policy must bring strong support to security sector reform which must notably ensure a clear separation of intelligence and law enforcement functions; calls on the EEAS, the Council and the Commission to reinforce its cooperation with the Committee for the Prevention of Torture and other relevant Council of Europe mechanisms in the planning and implementation of counter- terrorism assistance projects with third countries and in all forms of counter- terrorism dialogues with third countries;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Reiterates its call, required by international law and notably Article 12 of the CAT, for all states faced with credible allegations to end impunity and conduct thorough investigations and inquiries into all alleged acts of extraordinary rendition, secret prisons, torture and other serious human rights violations, so to determine responsibility and ensure accountability, including bringing individuals to justice where there is evidence of criminal liability; calls in this respect on the HR/VP and EU Member States to take all necessary measures to ensure a due follow-up to the UN Joint Study on global practices in relation to secret detention in the context of countering terrorism , in particular regarding the follow-up letter sent by the Special Mandates holders on 21 October 2011 to 59 states asking their respective governments to provide an update on the implementation of the recommendations contained in this study;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 44 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas the 2011 Council of Europe report states that the data obtained from the Polish agencies in 2009 and 2010 'provide definite proof' that seven CIA-associated aircraft landed in Poland; whereas a ‘in March 2012, the Polish media claimed that charges had been brought against the former heads of Poland's intelligence services3; whereas in December 2011, a CIA 'black site' was identified in Romania by investigative journalists on the basis of information provided by former CIA employees in the Romanian national registry office for 1 ‘Inside Romania’s secret CIA prison’, The Independent, 9.12.2011. 2 ‘Inside Romania’s secret CIA prison’, The Independent, 9.12.2011. 3 http://wyborcza.pl/1,75478,11425498,Zarzuty_za_polskie_wiezienie_CIA.html; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/poland/9169366/Poland-ex-spy-boss-charged-over- classified information(*)1; whereas former Libyan dissidents have started legal proceedings against the UK for the direct involvement of MI6 in their own and their family members' rendition, secret detention and torture;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 45 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Pays tribute to US civil society initiatives to set up in 2010 an independent bipartisan taskforce to examine the US Government's policy and actions related to the capture, detention and prosecution of "suspected terrorists" and US custody during the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 46 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H
H. whereas the Lithuanian authorities have endeavoured to shed light on their countryLithuania's involvement in the CIA programme by carrying out parliamentary and judicial inquiries; whereas the parliamentary investigation by the Seimas Committee on National Security and Defence concerning the alleged transportation and confinement of persons detained by the CIA on Lithuanian territory established that five CIA-related aircraft landed in Lithuania between 2003 and -2005 and that two tailored facilities suitable for holding detainees in Lithuania (Projects Nos .1 and Project No.2) were prepared at the request of the CIA; whereas numerousthe LIBE delegation thanks the Lithuanian authorities for welcoming the Members of the European Parliament in Vilnius in April 2012 and having allowed the LIBE delegation access to Project No. 2; whereas the layout of the buildings and installations inside appear compatible with the detention of prisoners; whereas many questions related to CIA operations in Lithuania remain open despite the subsequent judicial investigation subsequently conducted in 2010 and closed in January 2011; whereas the Lithuanian authorities have expressed their readiness to re- launch investigations if other new information were to come to light and whereas the Prosecutor's Office offered to provide further information on the criminal investigation in response to a written request from the European Parliament;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas research and court findings on the logistics involved in covering up these illegal operations related to the CIA programme, including dummy flight plans and the use of private aviation companies to conduct CIA renditions, haves further revealed the systematic nature and the extent of the European involvement in the CIA programme; whereas an analysis of the new data provided by Eurocontrol supports in particular the argument that to conceal the origin and destination of prisoners' transfers, contractors operating renditions missions switched from one plane to another mid-route;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 52 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)
Ja. whereas the need to protect legitimate state secrets can never be invoked to limit the legal obligations of states to investigate serious human rights violations;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 53 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J b (new)
Jb. whereas, according to the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture: "the interrogation techniques applied in the CIA-run overseas detention facilities have certainly led to violations of the prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment"1;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 54 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Recalls that the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture requires the setting up of monitoring systems covering all situations of deprivation of liberty, and insists on the fact that adhering to this international instrument adds a layer of protection; strongly encourages EU partner countries to ratify the Optional Protocol and to create independent national preventive mechanisms that are in compliance with the Paris Principles, and to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 55 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Deplores the Macedonian Government's failure to take any investigative steps regarding the illegal detention and abduction of Khaled El- Masri and the lack of action by the Office of the Skopje Prosecutor to carry out a criminal investigation into Mr El-Masri's complaint; notes that the European Court of Human Rights has taken up the case of Mr El-Masri and that the Grand Chamber had its first hearing on 16 May 2012; considers that allegations against the Macedonian Government's conduct in the case of Mr El-Masri are inconsistent with the EU's founding principles of fundamental rights and the rule of law and must be duly raised by the Commission in the framework of the Macedonia accession process to the EU;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 56 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Is particularly concerned by the procedure conducted by a US military commission regarding Mr Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri who could be sentenced to death if convicted; reiterates its long- standing opposition to the death penalty in all cases and under all circumstances and notes that Mr al-Nashiri's case has been before the European Court of Human Rights since 6 May 2011; calls on Poland and Romania to conduct effective investigations into their role in secret detentions and renditions and to use all available means to ensure that Mr al- Nashiri is not subjected to the death penalty; urges the HR/VP to raise the case of Mr al-Nashiri as a matter of priority with the US and to implement with its strategic partner the EU Guidelines on the death penalty;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 63 #

2012/2033(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls on the Conference of Delegations Chairs to ensure that parliamentary dialogues be initiated on the protection of fundamental rights while countering terrorism on the basis of and in follow-up to the findings of the UN Joint Study on global practices in relation to secret detention in the context of countering terrorism and of the UN compilation of good practices on legal and institutional frameworks and measures that ensure respect for human rights by intelligence agencies while countering terrorism, including their oversight;
2012/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 77 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses concerns regarding the obstacles encountered by national parliamentary and judicial investigations into Member States' involvement in the CIA programme, as documented in detail by the 2011 Council of Europe report on abuse of state secrecy and national security, including lack of transparency, classification of documents, prevalence of national and political interests, narrow remit of investigations, restrictions of victims' right to effective participation and defence, lack of rigorous investigative techniques and of cooperation between investigative authorities across the EU;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Urges Member States to establish the truth concerning their involvement in the CIA programme and meet their obligation to investigate human rights violations by conducting independent and effective inquiries, taking into account all the new evidence that has come to light; urges in particular that Member States investigate into the matter of whether any individuals were held in CIA secret detention centres on EU territory;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 90 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Urges Romania to meet its legal obligation to launch an independent and effective inquiry into CIA secret CIA detentions on its territory; expects the Romanian General Prosecutor to initiate a criminal investigation into alleged CIA secret detention sites in Romania, in particular in light of the new evidence on flight connections between Romania and Lithuania;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes theEncourages Poland to persevere in its ongoing criminal investigation into secret detention launched in Poland, andbut deplores the lack of official communication on the scope, the conduct and the state of play of the investigation; calls on the Polish authorities to conduct a rigorous inquiry, with due transparency, allowing thefor effective participation of victims and their lawyers;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the readCalls on the Lithuanian authorities to honour their commitment to re-open the criminal invess expressed by the Lithuanian authorities to reopen an inquiry if other new information comes to lighttigation into Lithuania's involvement in the CIA programme if new information came to light, in view of new evidence provided by the Eurocontrol data showing that the plane N787WH, alleged to have transported Abu Zubaydah, did stop in Morocco on 18 February 2005 on its way to Romania and Lithuania; notes that analysis of the Eurocontrol data also reveals new information through flight plans connecting Romania to Lithuania, via a plane switch in Tirana, Albania on 5 October 2005, and Lithuania to Afghanistan, via Cairo, Egypt, on 26 March 2006; considers it essential that the scope of new investigations should cover, beyond abuse of power by state officials, possible unlawful detention and ill-treatment of persons on Lithuanian territory; encourages the Lithuanian Prosecutor- General's oOffice to substantiate with documentation the affirmations made during the LIBE delegation's visit to the effect that the "categorical" conclusions ofrom the judicial inquiry are that "no detainees have been detained in the facilities of Projects No 1 and No 2 in Lithuania";
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on all Member States such as Finland, Denmark and Portugalto abide by the freedom of information requests and to disclose all the necessary information on all suspect planes associated with the CIA and their territory;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 111 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on Lithuania, Poland and Romania to respond to the letters sent on 21 October 2011 by the UN mandate holders in relation to the follow-up of the Joint Secret Detention Study prepared by the mandates of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, the Working group on Arbitrary Detention, and the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate and support cooperation between investigating authorities and lawyers involved in accountability work in member states to ensure exchange of relevant data and expertise between legal practitioners; and promote the effective use of all available EU instruments and resources;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 134 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the European Ombudsman to investigate the failures of the Commission and the Council and the EU security agencies, notably Europol and Eurojust to respect fundamental rights and principles of good administration and loyal cooperation in their response to the TDIP recommendations;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 143 #

2012/2033(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments., the European Ombudsman, the governments and parliaments of the member states of the candidate Member States and the associated countries, and to the Council of Europe, NATO, the United Nations and the Government and two Houses of Congress of the United States, and to request them to keep Parliament informed of any development that may take place in the fields falling in the remit of the report;
2012/05/30
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 4 #

2012/2032(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Considers it essential to ensure cooperation with the countries of origin and transit of refugees through support for regional protection programmes, a suitable resettlement policy, diplomatic representations in third countries and the correct application of exceptions to visa rules to ensure improved access to the Common European Asylum Systemdevelop a sustained and open dialogue between the EU and the countries of origin and transit of refugees so as to ensure an effective protection of refugees based on the principle of solidarity as enshrined in Article 21 of TEU; calls in this regard on the Commission to provide the Parliament with a thorough evaluation of the effectiveness of regional protection programmes in terms of protection of refugees; calls on the EU Member States to commit themselves to duly implement the EU Joint Resettlement Programme;
2012/06/19
Committee: AFET
Amendment 11 #

2012/2032(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers it essential that the EuU does not export the responsibility of processing asylum claims to third countries and that the respect of the principle of non refoulement is fully ensured;
2012/06/19
Committee: AFET
Amendment 19 #

2012/2032(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for the EUREMA relocation pilot project to be more widely adopted and for the establishment of a permanent programme for resettlement between Member States of beneficiaries of international protection that should notably allow asylum seekers and refugees to choose the country they want to go to;
2012/06/19
Committee: AFET
Amendment 121 #

2012/2025(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses that the objective of the accession process is full EU membership and that this in no way should be turned into an open-ended process with delaying tactics leading to possible different solutions unless a new perspective has been agreed between the parties;
2012/06/08
Committee: AFET
Amendment 1167 #

2012/0011(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
The controller shall communicate any rectification or any erasure carried out in accordance with Articles 16 and 17 to each recipient to whom the data have been disclosed, unless this proves impossible or involves a disproportionate effort. The controller shall inform the person concerned of the existence of these third parties.
2013/03/04
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1409 #

2012/0011(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Unless the deceased person has explicitly stipulated otherwise, his or her heirs shall have the right to insist that the controller cease processing and erase his or her personal data.
2013/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1422 #

2012/0011(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where the controller referred to in paragraph 1 has made the personal data public, it shall take all reasonable steps, including technical measures, in relation to data for the publication of which the controller is responsible, to inform third parties which are processing such data, that a data subject requests them to erase any links to, or copy or replication of that personal data. Where the controller has authorised a third party publication of personal data, the controller shall be considered responsible for that publication without justification on the basis of Article 6(1)(b), (c), (d) and (e), it shall take all necessary steps to erase that data, without prejudice to Article 77.
2013/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2269 #

2012/0011(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 2
2. The controller or processor shall ensure that the data protection officer performs the duties and tasks independently and does not receive any instructions as regards the exercise of the function. The data protection officer shall in each Member State be given procedural guarantees ensuring his or her independence and penalising any attempts to obstruct him in the full performance of his or her duties. The data protection officer shall directly report to the management of the controller or the processor.
2013/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2279 #

2012/0011(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. The controller or the processor shall support the data protection officer in performing the tasks and shall provide all necessary resources, including staff, premises, equipment, access to information and any other resources necessary to carry out the duties and tasks referred to in Article 37 and update his or her professional knowledge.
2013/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 36 #

2011/2245(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) show that, in order to achieve the objectives spelled out above, the creation of a new Fund is more appropriate and more effective than revision of the existing instruments, particularly the EIDHR;
2011/12/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 85 #

2011/2245(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g
(g) enable the EED to award grants directly to the intended beneficiaries and re-grant financial resourcegive preference to awarding grants through non- profit entities, such as foundations and NGOs; particularly at the beginning,, over the direct award of grants to final beneficiaries; re- granting will be an effective mechanism to enable the EED to work with partners on the ground that have the requisite knowledge and local infrastructure and enjoy the trust of local people;
2011/12/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 103 #

2011/2245(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point k
(k) structure the EED as an administratively flexible and efficient Brussels-based structure, with straightforward grant-award mechanisms; applicants should not be required to undergo cumbersome tendering procedures; co-financing by beneficiaries should not be a prerequisite for funding; the award of grants should, however, be conditional on compliance with strict and clear criteria and the list of beneficiaries should be made public; appropriate procedures and safeguards should be implemented to avoid any form of fraud and misuse of funds granted directly or indirectly to beneficiaries;
2011/12/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 123 #

2011/2245(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point n
(n) ensure that Parliament is involved and consulted throughout the entire process of the creation, setting-up and running of the EED, inter alia through the inclusion of a number of MEPs on its Board of Governors and its Executive Committee, in order to guarantee political balance and to enable Parliament to provide its input into defining the political and strategic guidelines underpinning the endowment's activitie, priorities, expected results and overall financial allocations in a meaningful and systematic manner;
2011/12/20
Committee: AFET
Amendment 21 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas respect for and promotion of democracy and human rights – particularly women’s rights – justice and the rule of law, fundamental freedoms – including freedom of speech, conscience, religion, association and the media –, strengthening of security - including peaceful conflict resolution and good neighbourly relations -, democratic stability, prosperity, the fair distribution of income, wealth and opportunities, the fight against corruption and the promotion of good governance and sustainable development are founding principles and aims of the EU which must constitute common values at the core of the ENP review,
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 25 #

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Council and the Commission to give thorough consideration to the serious doubts raised by the Commission in its communication entitled ‘Evaluation of EU Readmission Agreements’ as regards respect for fundamental rights in the implementation of such agreements, by adopting a moratorium on the relevant negotiations;
2011/09/15
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 32 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas it is in the highest interest of the EU to be economically ambitious and politically focused in its support to democratic transitions learning from the failures and the mistakes of previous policies with regard, in particular, to the complacent approach towards the authoritarian regimes of the Southern neighbourhood,
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 44 #

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. CAsks the Commission to provide Parliament with a detailed report on the use of EU funds earmarked for neighbouring countries; calls on the Commission to favour thegive priority to channelling of EU funds to projects aimed at protecting migrants’ rights;
2011/09/15
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 55 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Strongly wWelcomes the Joint Communication of the Commission and the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on A new response to a changing Neighbourhood and the approach presented therein, in particular regarding the principles of mutual accountability and shared commitment to universal values of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, as well as conditionality and, a tailor- made approach towards the partner countries and the principle of further involving societies within the ENP policy;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 57 #

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Strongly supports the partnership with societies approach and thus calls on the Commission and the Vice-President/High Representative to develop mechanisms to ensure its full application, in particular by setting up a monitoring mechanism involving civil society in the definition of objectives and benchmarkscriteria and in the implementation and monitoring of all agreements with partners; by maintaining a transparent dialogue on JHA matters with democratically elected authorities and national parliaments; and by increasing the democratic scrutiny of the EP in all mechanisms and dialoguedialogues and agreements on migration;
2011/09/15
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 58 #

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Recalls that, according to the mandate of the Frontex agency, Parliament must be fully informed as soon as possible of agreements concluded between that agency and the authorities of third countries;
2011/09/15
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 69 #

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission and the Council to urgently address the refugee crisis by conducting an enquiry into the shipwrecks of boat people, providing the EP with a detailed report on the Frontex Hermes operation, condemning the agreement concluded between the Italian authorities and the Transitional National Council of Libya, providing support to Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey and Lebanon, in particular by exploring the possibility of setting up a humanitarian corridor, and unblocking without delay the negotiations on the Joint EU Resettlement Programme;
2011/09/15
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Insists that differentiation based on performance and achievements should be predicated on clearly defined criteria and assessable benchmarks and calls in this regard on the Commission and the EEAS to consider the benchmarks laid down in the Joint Communication as objectives to be achieved and that, for assessing the progress made, these objectives require more specific, measurable, achievable, time bound benchmarks; Is of the opinion that a result-oriented policy needs a clearer methodology of benchmarking; Stresses that this approach has to be reflected in the structure of the ENP Action Plans and in the relating annual progress reports;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 70 #

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the Member States, in partnership with the UNHCR, to resettle refugees having fled Libya who are still stuck in camps on the Tunisian and Egyptian borders, and whose lives would be endangered by a return to Libya on account of the atrocities being committed against sub-Saharan peoples, who are assumed to be pro-Gaddafi mercenaries;
2011/09/15
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the proposal for a European Endowment for Democracy, which is a timely response to the clamour for democracy by the populations of our neighbouring countries; underlines that it should be based on the principles of transparency and flexibility and should complement already-existing EU Instruments and the exemplary work of longstanding European political or non- political foundations; stresses that its scope and organisation should be clearly defined and that its structures and procedures should be light and straightforward; calls for a truly political steering committee to be established with the participation of the European Parliament, which should also be involveQuestions the added value of establishing a European Endowment for Democracy and regrets the Commission’s lack of clarity on this subject; recognises the need to respond better to the clamour for democracy by the populations of our neighbouring countries, but points out that the European Union has varied and effective instruments at its disposal which could be improved and strengthened, in particular the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument; stresses the need to avoid any excessive growth in instruments and to guard against the risk of establishing an endowment partly funded from the Community budget which would not be subject to European Parliament budgetary control; insists on a right of scrutiny for the European Parliament in the process of setting up the possible future EED, in the determination of annual objectives, priorities, expected results and financial allocations in broad terms, and in the implementation and monitoring of activities; highlights the contradictory statements concerning the possibility of the EED financing foreign political parties, and sin the ex-post control mechanisms; cerely hopes that clarification on this subject will be forthcoming;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 101 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses the importance of building a partnership with societies and,s direct reply of Arab spring’s expectations, which must guarantee the active participation of civil society actors in the process of good governance; Insists in this regard on the necessity to set up a civil society monitoring mechanism in order to ensure its systematic participation in the definition and evaluation process of the implementation of agreements and programs; Emphasises that these partnerships with civil society must be inclusive, including in particular representatives of women’s organisations and minority groups; in that context, takes note of the proposal for a Civil Society Facility (CSF) as a way to target resources more effectively and efficiently towards civil society; calls for a greater clarification of the CSF in terms of complementarities with the EIDHR and the ENPI;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 114 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the EEAS and the Commission to provide a clear methodology and detailed benchmarks to assess the democracy and human rights record of these countries and to deliver regular sufficiently detailed reports, which should be the basis for the allocation of funds under the new performance-based approach ‘more for more’; asks for these evaluations to be included in the ENP progress reports and to be presented annually to its Committee on Foreign Affairs; insists on the need to systematically include civil- society organisations at all stages of the review process, for instance through consultation mechanisms similar to those used for accession countries, where local and international civil society are invited to provide written input and share analysis;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 130 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that human rights situations should be continuously monitored and that an annual assessment of the situation couldhuman rights dialogues conducted with all partner countries and that an annual assessment of the situation as well as the outcomes of the dialogues must be included in the annex toin the annual progress report of each partner country with a clear mechanism to reconsider and progressively limit bilateral cooperation if human rights violations are confirmed;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 145 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses, in particular, the importance of promoting the rights of the child and ensuring child protection, as enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 149 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that sustainable democracy, functioning and de-bureaucratised institutions and the rule of law not only promote political stability and social welfare but also stimulate economic growth by improving the business environment and attracting investment, allowing new SMEs to emerge and fostering trade, green economy and tourism, all of which generate new jobs and new opportunities;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 160 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Strongly supports the promotion of sub-regional cooperation and cross-border projects and stresses the importance of developing partner-to- partner bilateral and multilateral economic cooperation, which would bring tangible benefits for citizens and improve the political climate in the region;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 181 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. States that differentiation should be applied to trade, invites ENP partner countries to move forward on creating the conditions that will allow the establishment of Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas (DCFTAs) and calls on the EU to assist them in their reform efforts and to open its internal market accordingly; underlines that the EU should alsopreviously assess the political, social and environmental circumstances of each country with reference to their participation in the future DCFTA; and eventually define gradual steps in its implementation;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 195 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the reference to Article 49 of the TEU and believes that all partner countries of the Eastern Partnership (EaP) have a legitimate right to strive for EU membership; believes that the conclusion of association agreements does not exclude this perspective but can, on the contrary, be an important step towards further European integration;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 203 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Reaffirms that, for the Southern partnership, the aim should be mutually beneficial and ambitious trade arrangements which can lead to DCFTAs, which will surely represent the first step towards a big ‘Euro-Mediterranean Economic Space’, which willcould also help to solvalleviate the economic problems of our neighbouring partners in the South;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 209 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that the EU should foster synergies between European external and internal policies, particularly through the approximation of legislation aimed at job creation, poverty reduction, energy efficiency, development of renewable sources and environmental security and improvement of social protection;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 257 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the EU should advance its work on visa facilitation and readmission agreements, with a view to moving – once all conditions are met – to a visa-free regime; underlines that the provisions on asylum must be fully in line with international obligations and commitments and EU standards, especially in the human rights field;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 262 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on the EU Member States to make greater use of the opportunities offered by the EU Visa Code while improving and harmonizing its application in order to guarantee equal and fair conditions for applicants in all Member States;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 266 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Believes that the multilateral dimension of the EaP is a key element for a successful neighbourhood policy and should be further strengthened and developed, including the Civil Society Forum; welcomes the proposal to use the multilateral framework more strategically to advance bilateral relations between the partners and expects concrete measures aimed at putting this proposal into practicehose capacity and participation should be reinforced and enhanced, inter alia by a permanent independent secretariat;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 270 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Welcomes the proposal to use the multilateral framework more strategically in order to advance bilateral relations between the partners and expects concrete measures aimed at putting this proposal into practice; expects in this regard with high interest the roadmap with objectives, instruments and actions announced by the HR/VP and the Commission by the end of the year;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 283 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls that the EU should get more involved and play a more active, coherent and constructive role in resolution of regional conflicts inter alia via the EEAS by developing more confidence- building measures, considering new pragmatic and innovative approaches, launching public communication strategies, supporting civic culture and community dialogue andpromoting a European civilian peace corps and local mediation actions, supporting civic culture, people-to-people exchanges and community dialogue, involving civil society organisations, developing cross- border projects, strengthening good- neighbourly relations;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 326 #

2011/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Regrets that a high percentage of the ENP funds available are spent on consultancy instead of going to projects and programmes and calls, in this respect, for a quick rebalance in the new instrument in their use;
2011/10/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 71 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) The Union seeks to promote, develop and consolidate the values of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, principles of equality and the ruArticle 21 of the Treaty on European Union provides that its external action shall be guided by the same principle which have inspired its own creation: democracy, the rule of law, the universality and indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for human dignity, the principles of equality, respect for human dignity, the principles of law on which it is founded through dialogue and cooperation with third countriesequality and solidarity and respect for the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 77 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
(4) Since it was launched, the European Neighbourhood Policy has significantly strengthened relations with partner countries and brought tangible benefits to both the Union and its partners.deleted
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 88 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
(7) A number of major developments have taken place since the European Neighbourhood Policy was launched and the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument was set up. These include a deepening of the relationship with the partners, the launch of regional initiatives and democin the Neighbourhood has led to a comprehensive Strategic transition processes in the region. This triggered a new European Neighbourhood Policy vision set out in 2011 as a result of a comprehensive Strategic Review of theReview of the European Neighbourhood Policy. It outlines key objectives for Union cooperation with Neighbourhood countries and provides for greater support to partners committed to building deep and sustainable democratic societies and undertaking reforms, in line with the 'more for more' and 'mutual accountability' principles. These include a deepening of the relationship with the partners and civil society of the countries involved if the requirements based on the deep democracy approach are met, the launch of regional initiatives and a strong support to democratic transition processes in the region.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 100 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Through a renewed Neighbourhood Policy, the Union will work towards establishing a partnership with societies across the Eastern and Southern countries as too often in the past the Union has privileged relations with those in power over societies. Non- governmental actors and other independent stakeholders are key actors in promoting democratic reforms. This Policy will therefore establish an institutionalised mechanism aimed notably at developing CSOs' ability to monitor reforms and participate in good governance process of public policies and programmes.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 127 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) Furthermore, since the objectives of this Regulation, namely to promote deep democracy and "more for more" at the core of the enhanced political cooperation and a rights-based progressive economic integration between the European Union and neighbouring countries, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 132 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
(21) Gender equality and, women empowerment, anti- discrimination, social justice and social inclusion, fight against inequalities as well as environmental sustainability including addressing climate change should be a cross-cutting objective in all actions undertaken under this Regulation.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 143 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. The Union aims to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness involving the European Union and the countries and territories listed in the Annex to this Regulation (hereinafter ‘the partner countries’) by developing a special relationship consistent with Articles 2, 3, 6, 21 of TEU and 8, 9, 10, 11 of TFEU.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 158 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. Support under this Regulation shall promote the objectives of deep democracy, fight against inequalities and sustainable and inclusive development at the core of the enhanced political cooperation and of the progressive economic integration between the Union and the partner countries and, in particular, the implementation of partnership and cooperation agreements, association agreements or other existing and future agreements, and jointly agreed action plans.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 161 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) promoting the indivisibility of human rights and fundamental freedoms, the rule of law, principles of equality and fight against discrimination in all its forms, gender equality and women empowerment, establishing deep and sustainable democracy, promoting good governance and developing a thriving civil society including social partnersand civil partners in particular in the field of environment and sustainable development;
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 171 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) achieving a rights-based progressive integration into the Union internal market and enhanced sector and cross-sectoral co- operation including through legislative approximation and regulatory convergence towards Union and other relevant international standards, related institution building and investments, notably in interconnections;
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 173 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) strengthening domestic accountability and establishing an institutionalised consultation and monitoring mechanism with civil society organisations, environmental and social partners and other non-state actors;
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 176 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) creating conditions for well managed mobility of people, such as visa facilitation as first step towards visa liberalisation and promotion of people-to- people contacts;
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 184 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) sustainable and inclusivinclusive and sustainable development in all aspects, poverty reduction, environmental protection, including through private-sector development; promotion of internal economic, social and territorial cohesion, rural development, climate action and disaster resilience. This Regulation contributes to the objectives of dedicating at least 20 percent of the Union budget to move towards a low carbon and climate resilient society. Actions in these areas, wherever possible, will be mutually supportive in order to reinforce each other's impacts;
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 190 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) promoting confidence building and other measures contributing to securityhuman and civil security, peace-building and the prevention and settlement of conflicts;
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 201 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. The achievement of these objectives shall be measured using notably the relevant EU periodicUnion annual progress reports on the implementation of the policy, and for paragraphs 2(a), (d) and (e), the relevant indicators established by international organisations and other relevant bodies; for paragraphs 2(b), (c) and (d) the uptake of the EUnion regulatory framework by the partner countries as relevant; for paragraphs 2(c) and (f), the number of relevant agreements and cooperation actions. The indicators will include, among others, adequately monitored democratic elections, level of corruption, trade flows, indicators enabling measuring internal economic disparities, including employment levelobjectives of deep democracy as developed in the renewed European Neighbourhood Policy must be dully assessed in the overall evaluation of the achievement, among others, adequately monitored democratic elections and free and fair elections, freedom of association, expression and assembly and a free press and media, gender equality, fight against discrimination, the rule of law, an independent judiciary and the right to a fair trial, fighting against corruption, security and law enforcement sector reform and the establishment of democratic control over armed and security forces.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 208 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Jointly agreed action plans or other equivalent documents consistent with the objectives of building a sustainable and deep democracy between the partner countries and the Union shall provide the key point of reference for setting the priorities for Union support.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 215 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Union support provided under this Regulation to each partner country shall be differentiated in form and amounts according to the partner country's commitment to reforms and its progress in implementing these reforms. Its support shall be adapted in line with progress on democracy, and that it might be reconsidered or reduced. Such differentiation shall reflect the level of ambition of the country's partnership with the Union, its progress in building deep and sustainable democracy, its progress in implementing agreed reform objectives, the country's needs and capacities, and the potential impact of Union support.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 222 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Union support under this Regulation shall, in principle, be established in partnership with the beneficiaries. The partnership shall, involve as appropriate, national, regional and local authorities, other stakeholders, civil society, soci a transparent and verifiable way and through an institutionalised mechanism, involve the following stakeholders in preparing, implementing, monitoring and evaluating Union support: (i) civil society organisations; (ii) social and environmental partners and; (iii) other non-state actors in preparing, implementing and monitoring Union support. . The Commission, and in particular the Union's delegations in partner countries, shall ensure that appropriate steps are taken to set up this mechanism aimed at enhancing the capacities of civil society organisations and other stakeholders to play a meaningful part in that process and to grant an effective domestic accountability over public policies and programmes.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 271 #

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17
Without prejudice to the provisions on the suspension of aid in partnership and cooperation agreements and association agreements with partner countries and regions, where a partner country fails to observe the principles of democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, the Union shall invite the country concerned to hold consultations in view of finding a solution acceptable to both parties, except in cases of special urgency. Where consultation with the country concerned does not lead to a solution acceptable to both parties, or if consultations are refused or in case of special urgency, the Council may take appropriate measures in accordance with Article 215(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which may include full or partial suspension of Union support while further reinforcing its support to civil society actors.
2012/06/15
Committee: AFET
Amendment 61 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
(13) This instrument should be implemented in full respect of the rights and principles enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Geneva Refugee Convention, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the UN human rights treaties, international humanitarian law and the principle of non-refoulement.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
(18) The Instrument should also support the development by the European Union of IT systems which would equip Member States with the tools to manage the movement of third-country nationals across borders more efficiently and to ensure a better identification and verification of travellers (‘smart borders’). To this end, a programme should be established the aim of which is to cover cost for the development of both the central and national components of such systems, ensuring technical consistency, cost savings and a smooth implementation in the Member States.deleted
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 71 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
(19) To address immediately unforeseen migratory pressure and threatrisks to border security it should be possible to provide emergency assistance in accordance with the framework set out in Regulation … 2012/EU laying down general provisions on the Asylum and Migration Fund and on the instrument for financial support for police co-operation, preventing and combating crime, and crisis management.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
(20) Moreover, in the interest of enhanced solidarity in the Schengen area as a whole, where weaknesses or possible threatrisks are identified, notably following a Schengen evaluation, the Member State concerned should follow the matter up adequately by using resources under its programmes by priority, where applicable, complementing emergency assistance measures.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
(24) In the same vein, the scope of the actions and the ceiling for resources which remain available to the Union (‘Union actions’) should be increased to enhance the capacity of the Union to carry out in a given budget year multiple activities on the management of external borders and the common visa policy in the interest of the Union as a whole, when and insofar as the needs arise. Such Union actions include studies and pilot projects to further the policy and its application, measures or arrangements in third countries addressing migratory pressures from those countries in the interest of an optimal management of migration flows into the Union and an efficient organisation of the related tasks at external borders and consulates.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) ‘risk’ means a factor that affects or is expected to affect the quality of control at external borders, the smooth crossing of external borders as well as the effective access to the territory of Member States for third-country nationals in need of international protection.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. The general objective of the Instrument shall be to contribute to ensuring a high level of security in the European Unionuniform and high-quality external border control while facilitating mobility in a secure environment into European Union, making sure that the Union’s commitment to fundamental freedoms and human rights is upheld.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 111 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) supporting the implementation of the asylum acquis at the external borders to ensure an effective access to the territory of Member States and to the registration procedure for third country nationals in need of international protection, in full compliance with Union law, the principle of non-refoulement and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The achievement of this objective shall be measured against indicators such as, inter alia, the number of applications for international protection at the external borders, the number of entries to the territory of Member States, the number of registered deaths at sea, the number of registrations at the external borders and the quality of reception.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 114 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) promoting the development and implementation and enforcement of policies ensuring the absence of any controls on persons, whatever their nationality, when crossing the internal borders, carrying out checks on persons and monitoring efficiently the crossing of external borders;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) gradually establishing an integrated management system for external borders, including the reinforcement of interagency co-operation between, inter alia, border control, migration, asylum and law enforcement authorities of Member States at the external borders and measures within the territory, including in the maritime border area and the necessary flanking measures related to document security and identity management as well as to saving lives at sea;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) promoting the development and implementation of the common policy on visas and other short-stay residence permits, including consular co-operation, the improvement of consular coverage in third countries, uniform and common administrative procedures and decisions on visa, making full use of practical improvements and flexibility provided by the Visa Code;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 126 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) setting up and running IT systems, their communication infrastructure and equipment supporting the management of migration flows across the external borders of the Union, in full respect of the Union data protection legislation;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 129 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point e
(e) ensuring the efficient and uniform application of the Union’s acquis on borders, asylum and visas, including the functioning of the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 139 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) operating equipment, means of transport and communication systems required for effective border control and the detection of persons, such as fixed terminals for VIS, SIS and the European Image Archiving System (FADO), including state-of-the-art technology;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 143 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) infrastructures, buildings and operating equipment required for the processing of visa applications and consular co- operation, as well as other actions aimed at improving the quality of service for the visa applicants;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) studies, pilot projects and actions aiming to ensure an effective compliance with European and international law concerning respect for human rights obligations, in close cooperation with civil society.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 165 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) EUR 2,000 million57% of the global budget for the national programmes of Member States;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 183 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. In order to allocate the amount indicated in point c) of Article 6(1), by 1 June 2017 the Commission shall establish, on the basis of input and in consultation with the Frontex Agency, the EASO, the Fundamental Rights Agency, civil society organisations and international organisations, a report which inter alia, in accordance with the Frontex risk analysis, shall set up threat levels at the external borders for the period 2017-2020. ThreatRisk levels will be based on the burden in border management and on the threatchallenges that affected security and safety, including search and rescue operations at sea, at the external borders of the Member States in 2014-2016 and they will take into account inter alia possible future trends on migratory flows and unlawful activities at the external borders considering the likely political, economic and social developments in the third countries concerned, in particular in neighbouring countries.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 186 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
The report shall determine the level of threatrisk for each section of the external border by multiplying the length of the border section concerned with the weighing attributed to it as follows:
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 187 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) factor 1 for normal threatrisk
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 188 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a – point ii
(ii) factor 3 for medium threatrisk
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 189 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a – point iii
(iii) factor 5 for high threatrisk;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 190 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b – point i
(i) factor 1 for normal threatrisk
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 191 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b – point ii
(ii) factor 3 for medium threatrisk
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b – point iii
(iii) factor 5 for high threatrisk.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 193 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) external maritime borders shall mean the outer limit of the territorial sea of the Member States as defined according to Articles 4 to 16 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. However, in cases where long range operations on a regular basis are required in order to prevent irregular migration/illegal entryhigh risk areas, this shallmay be the outer limit of high threat ara contiguous zone as defined in Article 33 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas. This shall be determined by taking into account the relevant data on these operations in 2014- 2016 as provided by the Member States in question.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 195 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) supporting and expanding the existing capacity at national level in visa policy and in the management of the external borders, with a view to prevent irregular migration lives lost at sea and to facilitate legitimate travel, including border crossings by persons in need of international protection, bearing in mind inter alia new technology, developments and/or standards in relation to the management of migration flows;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 198 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) supporting the further development of the management of migration flows by consular and other services of the Member State in third countries, with a view to facilitating lregitimate travel toular migration and mobility and preventing irregular migration into the Union;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) increasing the capacity to face upcoming challenges including present and future threats and pressures at the external borders of the Union, taking into account in particular the Frontex risk analysis.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 205 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) compliance with the Union acquis on borders, asylum and visa;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 210 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall set out, by implementingdelegated acts, reporting procedures on the application of this provision and any other practical arrangements, to be made between Member States and the Commission to comply with this Article. Those implementingdelegated acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 18(2)7.
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 214 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) to support the preparatory, monitoring, administrative and technical support, for the development of an evaluation mechanism, required to implement external borders, asylum and visa policies, including with regard to compliance with human rights obligations and humanitarian law, including to implement Schengen governance as determined by the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism as established by the Regulation (EU) No … on the establishment of an evaluation and monitoring mechanism to verify the application of the Schengen acquis and the Schengen Borders Code;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 216 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) to support and monitor the implementation of Union law and Union policy objectives in the Member States, and assess their effectiveness and impact, including on human rights;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 221 #

2011/0365(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) to boost the capacity of European networks to assess, promote, support and further develop Union policies and objectives;
2012/09/18
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1871 #

2011/0011(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point g
(g) a general indication of the time limits for erasure and conservation of the different categories of data;
2013/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 37 #

2010/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that measures and actions implementing the Internal Security Strategy are in compliance with the Union's fundamental rights obligations laid down in Articles 2, 6 and 7 TEU and external policy aims as spelled out in Article 21 TEU, principles developed by the United Nations, international human rights and humanitarian law, and respect for the concept of human security taking the security of the individual rather than that of the state as point of reference;
2012/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 61 #

2010/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Underlines that the fight against terrorism is a priority for the ISS, thwhose objectives and tools of which must be evaluated properly as indicated in Parliament'must be properly evaluated as expressed in its resolution of 14 December on the EU Counter-Terrorism Policy: main achievements and future challenges; outlines that prevention and protection policies must be further prioritiszed, along with prosecution and response; notes that, in this context, a greabetter focusing is needed on targeted law enforcement and intelligence-driven activities is needed activities with proven capacity to prevent terrorist attacks; recalls that for the EU to be a credible actor in promoting fundamental rights both internally and externally, the fight against terrorism should be conducted with full respect for fundamental rights and subject to proper oversight and accountability both at EU and national level, including thorough human right compliant investigations as regards alleged collaboration with CIA extraordinary rendition and secret detention;
2012/02/09
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 1 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
– having regard to Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which deals with non-discriminationin particular Articles 1, 8, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 35 and 45,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 2 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
– having regard to international human rights law, notably the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the 1992 UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 3 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)
– having regard to European conventions protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, notably the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) and the related case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the European Social Charter and the related recommendations of the European Committee of Social Rights, and the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities of the Council of Europe,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 4 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
– having regard to Article 2 and 3 of the Treaty on European Union, which defines human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights as founding values of the European Unionlays down the fundamental rights and principles underpinning the European Union, including the principle of non- discrimination and free movement,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
– having regard to Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, which confers on the EU the power to combat social exclusion and discrimination, promote social justice and protection, and promote economic, social and territorial cohes, 5(3), 8, 9, 10, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 151,153,157, 352 and to Title XVIII of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 6 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
– having regard to Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union, which provides a legal basis for Union action if the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, but can be better achieved at Union level,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
– having regard to Articles 9 and 10 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which obliges the Union to take into account - as a horizontal requirement- the promotion of a high level of employment, the guarantee of adequate social protection, the fight against social exclusion, and a high level of education, training and protection of human health, as well as the combating of discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 11 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6
– having regard to Article 19 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which gives the Council the power to take appropriate action to combat discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 12 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7
– having regard to Article 151 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which defines the promotion of employment, improved living and working conditions, and proper social protection as objectives of the Union and the Member States,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 13 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
– having regard to Article 153 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which defines the fields in which the Union is to support and complement the activities of the Member States, and in particular to Article 153(1)(h) on the integration of persons excluded from the labour market and Article 153(1)(j) on the combating of social exclusion,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
– having regard to Article 352 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘flexibility clause’), which provides for the adoption of appropriate measures to attain one of the objectives set out in the Treaties,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 15 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10
– having regard to Title XVIII of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which deals with economic, social and territorial cohesion,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 17 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 10 July 2008 on the census of the Roma on the basis of ethnicity in Italy1, 1 OJ C 294 E, 3.12.2009, p. 54.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 19 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 9 September 2010 on the situation of Roma and on freedom of movement in the European Union1, 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA- PROV(2010)0312.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 23 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 b (new)
– having regard to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data1, 1 OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 25 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)
– having regard to Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States1, 1 OJ L 158, 30.4.2004, p. 77.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 26 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 23
– having regard to the Commission Communication on the social and economic integration of the Roma in Europe (COM(2010)0133), the creation of a task-force1 (on 7 September 2010), the first findings of the Task Force2 and the reports of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 1 IP/10/1097. 2 MEMO/10/701 of 21.12.2010.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 27 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 a (new)
– having regard to the reports on Roma, racism and xenophobia in the Member States of the EU in 2009, published by the Fundamental Rights Agency1, and to the reports by the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Thomas Hammarberg, 1 Report on Racism and Xenophobia in the Member States of the EU in 2009; European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey, Data in Focus Report: The Roma in 2009; The Situation of Roma EU Citizens Moving to and Settling in Other EU Member States; and Housing Conditions of Roma and Travellers in the European Union: Comparative Report.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 28 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 b (new)
– having regard to the related recommendations, opinions and declarations made by the Council of Europe, such as the conclusions of the Council of Europe High-level meeting on Roma (Strasbourg, 20 October 2010)1, 1 CM(2010)133 final.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 29 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 c (new)
– having regard to the proclamation in 2005 of the Decade of Roma Inclusion and the establishment of the Roma Education Fund by a number of EU Member States, candidate countries and other countries in which the Union institutions have a significant presence,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 30 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 d (new)
– having regard to the recommendations adopted by the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination at its 77th session (2-27 August 2010),
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 31 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 25 e (new)
– having regard to the Council of Europe report entitled 'Fourth ECRI Report on France', published on 15 June 2010,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 32 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas a large proportion of Europe's 10-12 million Roma are struggling against an intolerable degree of social and economic exclusion and exclusion from human rights,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 38 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the European Union is founded on the principles enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and in the EU treaties, which include the principles of non-discrimination, the specific rights intrinsic to EU citizenship, free movement and equality,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 39 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the EU trio in their joint declaration on the second Roma Summit held in Cordoba on 8-9 April 2010 committed themselves to: advance the mainstreaming of Roma issues in European and national policies on fundamental rights and protection against racism, poverty and social exclusion, improve the design of the roadmap of the Integrated Platform on Roma Inclusion and prioritizing key objectives and results, ensure that existing financial instruments of the European Union, in particular the Structural Funds, are made available to the Roma,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 40 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B
B. whereas the EU has developed a range of useful tools, mechanisms and funds to foster the inclusion of Roma, but these are scattered across policy areas and their effect and benefit is hard to measure; and despite the existence of numerous joint initiatives and institutional approaches, the problems and challenges regarding the inclusion of Roma have so far not been met effectively and therefore the no- change option is unsustainable,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 46 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas despite the existence of numerous cooperation mechanisms and institutions, the problems and challenges regarding the inclusion of Roma have so far not been met effectively and therefore the no-change option is unsustainable,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 47 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas a large majority of Europe’s 10-12 million Roma are struggling against an intolerable degree of social and economic exclusion and continue to suffer serious systematic discrimination in education (in particular segregation), housing (in particular forced evictions and sub-standard living conditions, often in ghettos), employment (a particularly low employment rate) and equal access to healthcare and other public services, and whereas they have an astoundingly low level of political participation,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 48 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas a majority of European Roma became EU citizens after the 2004 and 2007 enlargements, so that they and their families enjoy the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 49 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas the EU Strategy should address the specific circumstances of Roma people, whether EU citizens or not and whether residing in their EU country of origin or not,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 50 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas repatriations and returns of Roma have been taking place in several Member States and are often accompanied by the stigmatisation of Roma and general anti-Gypsyism in political discourse,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 55 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas non-discrimination - although indispensable - is not by itself enoughis the first step to overcome the historic disadvantages of the Roma, and whereas it is therefore necessary to complement equality legislation and policies by addressing the specific needs of the Roma regarding the fulfilment of and access to their human rights to employment, housing, healthcare and educ, education and political participation by means of an EU-level strategy,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas the EU strategy on Roma inclusion should not lead to programmes that stigmatise ethnic Roma populations but to programmes that target marginalized and/or vulnerable populations, with particular attention to Roma populations, while respecting the multiple identity of each Roma individual,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas funding is available, e.g. the new opportunity provided under the Structural Funds to devote up to 2% of the total European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) allocation to housing expenditure in favour of marginalised communities, which will take effect in the course of 2010, or the existing possibilities under the European Social Fund, whereas, however, a large part of allocated funds to Roma do not benefit Roma,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 74 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas on 19 October 2010, the Commission announced the presentation of a EU Framework for national Roma strategies in April 20111, 1 MEMO/10/502.
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission to propose and the Council to adopt an EU Strategy on Roma Inclusion (hereinafter: ‘the Strategy’) as an indicative, inclusive and place-based action plan, which is prepared and implemented on a multi-level basis and that can evolve as needed; it should be built on the fundamental values of equality, access to rights, non- discrimination and gender equality; it shall be based on the tasks, objectives, principles and instruments defined by the Treaties and, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the relevant EU legislation, as referred to above, and on the shared competences, as well as the supporting, coordinating and complementary actions, of the Union;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a – introductory part
(a) adopt Priority Areas for the Strategy, above allsuch as:
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
human rights, in particular non- discrimination and human rights,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
- gender equality,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 88 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 b (new)
- free movement,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 96 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a – indent 6
empowerment of Roma civil societypolitical and civil participation of Roma, including Roma youth;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 1
adopt effective anti-discrimination measures and awareness-raisinglegislation and measures, including awareness-raising actions targeting Roma or non-Roma, in order to eradicate discriminatory obstacles, challenge prejudices, stereotypes, racism and anti- gypsyism, while ensuring effective recourse to justice and an end to impunity,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 2
– prejudices, stereotypes, racism and anti- gypsyism,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 116 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 3
– protection of victims of human rights abuses,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 4
ensure access to quality education for all, provide adult vocational training and access to lifelong learning, eradicate school segregation, promote early childhood education and intercultural education, adopt measures to prevent early school-leaving and academic failure, facilitate the access to secondary and higher education, combat the over- representation of Roma in special schools,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 130 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 5
– adult vocational training and access to lifelong learning,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 135 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 6
– basic care infrastructure,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 7
– school desegregation,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 146 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 8
– early childhood education,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 9
– intercultural education,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 155 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 10
– measures to prevent early school- leaving and academic failure,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 158 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 11
– secondary and higher education,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 12
– combating the over-representation of Roma in special schools,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 165 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 13
ensure effective access to the labour market and social services; develop micro- credit for entrepreneurship and self- employment, ensure the hiring of Roma staff in the public administration at all levels, especially in organisations participating in the programming and implementation of EU and national funded programmes for Roma inclusion,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 169 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 14
housing and territorial desegregensure access to quality and healthy housing; fight for housing and territorial desegregation, while guaranteeing the right to a registered address, including the possibility of registering with a civil society organisation,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 174 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 15
– addressing infrastructural and environmental aspects of housing,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 179 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 16
ensure access to quality healthcare and preventive measures to notably reduce health inequalities; ensure access to quality care infrastructure and services,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 188 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 17
– reduction of health inequalities,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 191 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 18
capacity-buildingempower the Roma, including by a capacity-building policy regarding civil society, promote active citizenship, encourage civil and political participation of Roma people,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 195 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 19
– active citizenship,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 200 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 20
– enlargement,deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 205 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 21
ensure gender equality by addressing the specific needs of Roma women, while involving them in the development of policies; stop the practice of child marriages;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 217 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 21 a (new)
- ensure the protection of victims of human rights abuses, including victims of anti-Roma hate crimes and violence,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 21 b (new)
- stop returns of Roma to countries where they might be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 222 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the importance of endorsing and controllsupervising the Strategy and its implementation in a transparent manner, with the primary responsibility falling on democratically accountable ministers within the Council, and emphasises that the Strategy should in no way be divisive for the EU, creating splits among Member States;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 238 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 2
to establish the task force as a permanent body to take responsibility for coordination, monitoring, reporting, facilitation of implementation and follow- up, thereby meeting the need for an independent, multi-sector body serving as an ‘external facilitator’ which can assess and balance the various national and sectoral interests in a manner acceptable to all,;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 245 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 3
– review and update the Strategy as appropriate on a regular basis, and seek endorsement from the European Parliament and Council for the changes made,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 247 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 4
– take into account the Priority Areas and Objectives of the Strategy in all its relevant policy initiatives and programme planning, at EU level,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 248 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 5
– report on the progressimplementation of the Strategy and the evaluation of results, and keepnational action plans and the evaluation of results which shall be documented by the FRA, including benchmarks and indicators; the Council and Parliament shall be informed on an annual basis,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 257 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 5 a (new)
- validate the conformity of national plans with the EU strategy,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 258 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 6
– ensure the involvement of concerned stakeholders at all levels and at all steps, and Roma communities from all levels through the European Roma Platform, and work in partnership with the other institutions, Member States and regions, international financing institutions, transnational programming bodies and intergovernmental organisations, such as the Council of Europe and initiatives such as the Decade of Roma Inclusion;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 269 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – indent 6 a (new)
- adopt the Strategy with the endorsement of the European Parliament;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 271 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to incorporate an enlargement dimension into the Strategy, respecting the status of all participants and clarifying the channels of communication and involving candidate countries and potential candidby developing pilot projects in candidate countries and potential candidates, which guarantee the development of national action plans in line with the EU Stratesgy;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 275 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on Member States to appoint a high level government official or and administrative body to act as ‘National Contact Point’ for the implementation of the Strategy and to ensure transparency of the reporting;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 287 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on Member States to abrogate transitional agreements for workers from Bulgaria and Romania and to stop forced returns of Roma to other EU countries, while guaranteeing individual treatment;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 288 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Calls on Member States to implement effectively the Strategy by adopting national action plans, in support and cooperation with local and regional levels, and Roma civil society and people;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 293 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Calls on the Commission to draw up a European crisis map, which identifies, measures and surveys those micro-regions in origin, transit and host Member States within the EU where inhabitants are hardest hit by discrimination, poverty and social exclusion on the basis of the following attributes:
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 295 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 1 a (new)
- discriminatory practices and racism,
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 300 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to consequently bring specific support, including financial support, to these micro-regions and directly develop pilot projects that include the participation of mediators in line with the Council of Europe programme and a specific follow- up of the evolution of the implementation of the Strategy;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 301 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls on the Commission to establish guidelines of good practices for Roma inclusion based on a exchange of experiences made in these pilot projects;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 306 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission and the Council to allocate a percentage of cohesion policy funding under the next Multiannual Financial Framework in order to provide explicit support for the Strategy by creating a Performance Reserve for the EU Strategy on Roma;deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 312 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Calls on the Commission to create a direct link between the allocation of financing and results by requiring that a certain percentage of commitment appropriations under each national indicative breakdown should be allocated as the Performance Reserve in accordance with the regulations governing the Funds;deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 316 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that earmarked funding for the Strategy should be made available on a competitive basis, as defined by the criterion of how the proposed project or intervention supports and implements the Objectives of the Strategy;deleted
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 322 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on Member States to implement the horizontal priority ‘Marginalised Communities’ within the framework of the EU Structural Funds and to participate in the EU-Roma network working on the good implementation of structural funds for Roma social inclusion;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 335 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to improve access to EU funds by local governments and NGOs working on Roma inclusion by the simplification of the rules;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 336 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Calls on the Commission and the Council to extend the scope of EU funding so that, besides development, the provision of quality public services also becomes eligible;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 347 #

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls on the Commission, the Council and Member States to ensure that Operational programmes take into account the Strategy so that projects do not directly or indirectly consolidate the segregation and exclusion of Roma;
2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2010/0303(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall provide the Member States and the Commission with the logistical, technical and scientific assistance needed and with a high level of expertise, in order to help them to apply the Union legislation properly in the field of maritime safety, maritime security including rescue and assistance, prevention of marine pollution caused by shipsand promotion of maritime security, to monitor its implementation and to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures in place.
2011/06/30
Committee: TRAN
Amendment 79 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) It should only be possible to apply for admission as a seasonal worker while the applicant is residing inside or outside the territory of the Member States.
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 117 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
(23) To facilitate enforcement, relevant designated third parties such as trade unions or other associations should be able to lodge complaints in order to ensure effective application of the Directive. This is considered necessary to address situations where seasonal workers or employers are unaware of the existence of enforcement mechanisms or hesitant to use these in their own name, out of fear of possible consequences.
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 122 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Directive shall apply to: a) third- country nationals who reside outsideapply to be admitted to the territory of a Member State for the purpose of employment as seasonal workers; (b) third-country nationals who are legally staying in the territory of thea Member States and who apply to be admitted to the territory of a Member State for the purpose of employment as seasonal workersfor a seasonal worker permit in that Member State; (c) third-country nationals who have applied for international protection in a Member State under Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted1 and whose application has not yet been the subject of a final decision. ____________ 1 OJ L 304, 30.9.2004, p. 12.
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 127 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This Directive shall apply to the agriculture, horticulture and tourism sectors. Member States may decide to extend its application to additional activities that are dependent on the passing of the seasons.
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 130 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – point b
(b) ‘seasonal worker’ means a third- country national who retains a legal domicile in a third country but resides temporarily for the purposes of employment in the territory of a Member State in a sector of activity dependent on the passing of the seasons, under one or more fixed-term work contracts concluded directly between the third-country national and the employer established in a Member State;
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 148 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a valid work contract or, as provided for in national law, a binding job offer to work as a seasonal worker in the Member State concerned with an employer established in the Member State that specifies, in the language(s) of the applicant and the employer, the rate of pay and the working hours per week or month and, when applicable, other relevant working conditions;
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 264 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The seasonal worker shall have the possibility to accept or refuse the accommodation provided by the employer.
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 272 #

2010/0210(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 a (new)
Article 16 a Monitoring and inspections 1. Member States shall ensure that appropriate monitoring mechanisms are put in place, that adequate and regular inspections are carried out on their territory by the relevant national authorities and that organisations representing workers' interest have access to the workplace and the accommodation if provided by the employer, to ensure that the provisions laid down in this Directive, in particular regarding rights, working conditions and accommodation, are fully respected throughout the duration of the seasonal workers' stay in the Member State concerned. 2. Member States shall ensure that at least 30% of companies offering seasonal employment established on their territory per year are subject to inspections. 3. The selection of companies to be inspected shall be based on a risk assessment to be drawn up by the competent authorities in the Member States taking into account factors such as the sector in which a company operates and any past record of infringement.
2011/07/20
Committee: LIBEEMPL
Amendment 73 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 1
(1) The development of a forward-looking and comprehensive European migration policy, based on human rights, solidarity and responsibility, remains a key policy objective for the European Union.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 5
(5) In 2004 the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 establishing the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union (Frontex) hereinafter referred to as the "Agency" which became operational in May 2005. The tasks of the Agency are defined in Chapter II, Article 2, of Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 7
(7) Efficient management of the external borders through checks and surveillance contributes to combat illegalrregular immigration and trafficking in human beings and to reduce the threatchallenges to the internal security, public policy, public health and international relations of the Member States.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 17
(17) The incident reporting scheme shall be used by the Agency to transmit, to the relevant national and EU public authorities and the Management Board, any information concerning credible allegations of breaches of, in particular, Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 or the Schengen Borders Code, including fundamental rights, during joint operations and pilot projects.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 91 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 19
(19) The Agency should provide training, including on fundamental rights, at European level for national instructors of border guards and additional training and seminars related to control and surveillance at the external borders and removal of third-country nationals illegalrregularly present in the Member States for officers of the competent national services. The Agency may organise training activities in cooperation with Member States on their territory. Member States should integrate the results of the Agency's work in this perspective in the national training programs of their border guards.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 92 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 20
(20) The Agency should monitor and contribute tofollow the developments in scientific research relevant for its field and disseminate this information to the Commission and the Member States.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 93 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 21
(21) In most Member States, the operational aspects of return of third- country nationals illegally present in the Member States fall within the competencies of the authorities responsible for controlling the external borders. As there is a clear added value in performing these tasks at Union level, the Agency should, in full compliance with the Union's return policy, accordingly provide the necessary assistance and coordination for organising joint return operations of Member States and identify best practices on the acquisition of travel documents and define a Code of Conduct to be followed during the removal of third-country nationals illegally present in the territories of the Member States. No Union financial means should be made available for activities and operations that are not carried out in conformity with the Charter of Fundamental Rights.deleted
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 96 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 22
(22) For the purpose of fulfilling its mission and to the extent required for the accomplishment of its tasks, the Agency may cooperate with Europol, the European Asylum Support Office, the Fundamental Rights Agency and other European Union Agencies and bodies, the competent authorities of third countries and the international organisations competent in matters covered by Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 in the framework of working arrangements concluded in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty. The Agency should facilitate the operational cooperation between Member States and third countries in the framework of the external relations policy of the European Union. The Agency should not duplicate the work of Europol or other agencies nor should it take over tasks from Europol or other agencies.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 99 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 27
(27) When ensuring the operational management of IT systems, the Agency should follow European and international standards, including on data protection, taking into account the highest professional requirements.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 100 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) The European Data Protection Supervisor concluded in his opinion in case 2009-0281 that Article 9, concerning return policy, of Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 was not clear enough to serve as a long-term legal basis and therefore a legal basis for data processing would need to be established, and that FRONTEX should implement necessary procedures to guarantee the rights of data subjects.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 103 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 - point 1
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. While considering that the responsibility for the control and surveillance of external borders lies with the Member States, jointly with the Agency, as a body of the Union as defined in Article 15 and in accordance with Article 19 of this Regulation, the Agency shall facilitate and render more effective the application of existing and future European Union measures relating to the management of external borders, in particular the Schengen Borders Code, and in accordance with relevant Union law, International law, obligations related to access to international protection, and fundamental rights. It shall do so by ensuring the coordination of Member States' actions in the implementation of those measures, thereby contributing to an efficient, high and uniform level of control on persons and surveillance of the external borders of the Member States. The Agency shall fulfil its tasks in full respect for relevant Union law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Council Decision 2010/252/EU of 26 April 2010 supplementing the Schengen Borders Code as regards the surveillance of the sea external borders in the context of operational cooperation coordinated by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union1; international law, including the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, obligations related to access to international protection, in particular the principle of non-refoulement, and fundamental rights. __________ 1 OJ L 111, 4.5.2010, p. 20.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 111 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point i
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) carry out risk analyses as defined in Article 4, including the evaluation of the capacity of Member States to face threats and pressurmanage control and surveillance at the external borders;
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 113 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point i
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) participate infollow the development of research relevant for the control and surveillance of external borders;
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 115 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point ii
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f
(ii) point (f) is replaced by the following: "(f) provide Member States with the necessary support, including, upon request, coordination regarding organising joint return operations;"deleted
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 118 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point iii
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) develop and operate information systems that enable swift and reliable exchanges of information regarding emerging riskchallenges at the external borders, including the Information and Coordination Network established by Council Decision 2005/267/EC, without prejudice to the fact that the Agency shall not process personal data;
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – point b
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
All border guards and other personnel of the Member States, as well as the staff of the Agency, including liaison officers deployed pursuant to Article 14(2) to third countries, shall, prior to their participation in operational activities organised by the Agency or their deployment to third countries, have received training in relevant EU and international law, including fundamental rights and access to international protection.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 130 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4
Joint operations and pilot projects should be preceded by a thorough risk analysis as defined in Article 4.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 132 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5
The Agency may also terminate joint operations and pilot projects if the conditions to conduct these initiatives are no longer fulfilled and/or if violations of fundamental rights and international protection obligations have occurred.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 137 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall constitute a pool of border guards called Frontex Joint Support Teams in accordance with the provisions of Article 3b, for possible deployment during joint operations and pilot projects referred to in paragraph 1. It shall decide on the deployment of human resources and technical equipment in accordance with Articles 3a and 7. A pool of independent experts specialised in the rights of aliens and international protection shall be created in order to reinforce the Agency's capacity to identify and refer persons in need of international protection to the competent national asylum authorities in the context of operations coordinated by the Agency. UNHCR, as well as non- governmental organisations with relevant expertise, shall be invited to join the operations both in advisory and in observer capacities. Such a permanent pool should work in close cooperation with relevant national asylum services and should participate on a systematic basis in joint operations and pilot projects.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 139 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Agency shall develop a Code of Conduct to apply to all Agency's staff, pooled border guards and other personnel participating in Agency's activities with a special focus on interpreters, including joint operations, Rapid Border Intervention Team deployments and pilot projects, describing the conduct expected of them in the performance of their duties in full compliance with fundamental rights, including the right to asylum. In this respect, any operation may be subject to spot-checks by an effective monitoring system.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The Agency shall evaluate the results of the joint operations, Rapid Border Intervention Team deployments and pilot projects and transmit the detailed evaluation reports within 60 days following the end of the activity to the Management Board. The Agency shall make a comprehensive comparative analysis of those results with a view to enhancing the quality, coherence and efficiency of future operations and projects to be included in its general report provided for in Article 20(2)(b). The evaluation reports shall cover the compliance with fundamental rights of the joint operations and pilot projects, taking into consideration the results of the monitoring carried out by independent observers. Those reports shall be made available to the European Parliament on request.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3 a (new) – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) a description of the situation, with modus operandi and objectives of the deployment, including the operational aim, as well as guidelines for the protection of fundamental rights;
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 149 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3a (new) – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point h
(h) an immediate incident reporting mechanism, including on violations of fundamental rights and international protection during joint operations, Rapid Border Intervention Team deployments and pilot projects, which shall be transmitted by the Agency to the relevant national and EU public authorities and to the Management Board, and a reporting and evaluation scheme containing detailed provisions on incident reporting, benchmarks for the evaluation report and final date of submission of the final evaluation report in accordance with Article 3(4).
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 151 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3a (new) – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point i
(i) regarding sea operations, specific requirements regarding the applicable jurisdiction and maritime law provisions concerning the geographical area where the joint operation takes place. In particular, those requirements shall, in accordance with Article 1, specify the place of disembarkation, as well as detailed measures regarding the provision of food, shelter, medical care and access to asylum and non-refoulement. They shall allow individuals to explain their circumstances during a personal interview and facilitate access to the asylum procedure through interpretation and legal advice if individuals wish to apply for asylum.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 157 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3a (new) – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point i a (new)
(ia) specific measures as needed to ensure compliance with fundamental rights and international protection, based on a previous human rights impact assessment.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 160 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 5
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 3b (new) – paragraph 4
4. Members of the Frontex Joint Support Teams shall, in thWhile performance ofing their tasks and in the exercise ofing their powers, fully respect fundamental rights and human dignity. Any measures taken in the performance of their tasks and in the exercise of their powers shall be proportionate to the objectives pursued by such measures. While performing their tasks and exercising their powers, members of the teamsmembers of the Frontex Joint Support Teams shall fully respect international human rights and humanitarian law, and shall not discriminate against persons on grounds of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 172 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 4 – paragraph 2
It shall prepare both general and tailored risk analyses, including on the risks of human rights violations, to be submitted to the Council and, the Commission and on request, to the European Parliament. For these purposes Member States shall provide the Agency with all necessary information regarding the situation and possible threatchallenges at the external borders as well as the human rights situation in the border regions.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 176 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 5 – paragraph 1
The Agency shall establish and further develop common core curricula for border guards' training and provide training at European level for instructors of the national border guards of Member States, including with regard to fundamental rights and access to international protection. The European Parliament shall have full access to the contents of the common core curricula. Member States shall integrate the common core curricula in the training of their national border guards. In developing, implementing and evaluating the common core curricula, the Agency shall work closely with the Fundamental Rights Agency, as well as with UNHCR and non-governmental organisations with relevant expertise.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 189 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 8
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 7 – paragraph 6
6. The Agency shall report on the composition and the deployment of equipment, which is part of the technical equipment pool, to the Management Board on a monthly basis. In case the minimum number of equipment referred to in paragraph 5 is not reached, the Executive Director shall inform the Management Board without delay. The Management Board shall take a decision on the prioritisation of the deployment of the technical equipment urgently and take the appropriate steps to remedy the identified shortcomings. It shall inform the Commission of the identified shortcomings and the steps taken. The Commission mayshall subsequently inform the European Parliament and the Council, together with its own assessment.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 10 – point -a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 8 e – paragraph 1 – point a
(-a) point a is replaced by the following: "(a) description of the situation, with modus operandi and objectives of the deployment, including the operational aim, as well as guidelines for the protection of fundamental rights;"
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 196 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Subject to the return policy of the Union, and in particular Directive 2008/115/EC, the Agency shall provide the necessary assistance, and upon request of the participating Member States ensure the coordination for organising joint return operations of Member States. The Agency may decide to finance or co-finance the operations and projects referred to in this paragraph, with grants from its budget in accordance with the financial rules applicable to the Agency. The Agency may also use Union financial means available in the field of return. The Agency shall ensure that in its grant agreements with Member States any financial support is conditional upon the full respect of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 199 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency shall develop a Code of Conduct for the return of illegally present third-country nationals by air which shall apply during all joint return operations coordinated by the Agency, describing common standardized procedures which should simplify the organisation of joint return flights and assure return in a humane manner and in full respect for fundamental rights, in particular the principles of human dignity, prohibition of torture and of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, right to liberty and security, the rights to the protection of personal data and non discrimination. The Code of Conduct shall allow for the suspension of a return where there are reasons to believe that the return would lead to a violation of fundamental rights. In the event of a breach of international and/or Union law, the return shall be suspended.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 201 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The Code of Conduct will in particular pay attention to the obligation set out in Article 8(6) of Directive 2008/115/EC to provide for an effective forced-return monitoring system. The monitoring of joint return operations should be carried out independently and should cover the whole joint return operation from the pre- departure phase until the hand-over of the returnees in the country of returna follow up of the situation of the returnee has been conducted in the country of return, especially with regard to how they were received at the arrival point, how they were treated by the third-country authorities and whether they were arrested. Personnel in charge of monitoring shall have access to all relevant facilities, including detention centres and aircraft, and receive the necessary training to perform their duties. Furthermore, observations of the monitor, which shall cover the compliance with the Code of Conduct and in particular fundamental rights, shall be made available to the Commission and form part of the internal Final Return Operation Report. In order to ensure transparency and a coherent evaluation of the forced-return operations, reports of the monitor shall be included in an annual reporting mechanism.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 202 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 12
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Agency shall ensure the respect of all data protection rights of returnees, including the right to be informed on request at all stages of the data that is held by the Agency or the Member States about the returnees, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 203 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 13
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. While performing their tasks and exercising their powers guest officers shall comply with international law, Union law, in accordance with fundamental rights, and the national law of the host Member State.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 205 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 13 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 10 – paragraph 3
(13a) In Article 10, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. Guest officers may only perform tasks and exercise powers under instructions from and, as a general rule, in the presence of border guards of the host Member State. Guest officers shall immediately inform the border guards of the host Member States about any person seeking international protection."
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 207 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 13 c (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 10 – paragraph 6
(13c) In Article 10 paragraph 6 is replaced by the following: "6. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, while performing their tasks and exercising their powers, guest officers shall be authorised to use force, including service weapons, ammunition and equipment, with the consent of the home Member State and the host Member State, in the presence of border guards of the host Member State and in accordance with the national law of the host Member State, and with the principles of necessity and proportionality."
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 208 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 13 d (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 10 – paragraph 7
(13d) In Article 10 paragraph 7 is replaced by the following: "7. By way of derogation from paragraph 6, service weapons, ammunition and equipment may be used in legitimate self-defence and in legitimate defence of guest officers or of other persons, in accordance with the national law of the host Member State and with the principles of necessity and proportionality."
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 216 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 13
The Agency may cooperate with Europol, the European Asylum Support Office, the Fundamental Rights Agency, other European Union agencies and bodies, and the international organisations competent in matters covered by this Regulation in the framework of working arrangements concluded with those bodies, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty and the provisions on the competence of those bodies. The European Parliament shall be informed, in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, of any such arrangements concluded by the Agency. The Agency may also invite representatives of third countries, other European Union agencies and bodies or international organisations to participate in its activities as referred to in Articles 3, 4 and 5. Such representatives shall receive appropriate training from the Agency prior to their participation, in particular in relation to fundamental rights.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 219 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. In matters covered by its activities and to the extent required for the fulfilment of its tasks, the Agency shall facilitate the operational cooperation between Member States and third countries, in the framework of the European Union external relations policy, including with regard to human rights. For that reason, no operation may take place under the jurisdiction of any third country.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 222 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The Agency may deploy liaison officers, which should enjoy the highest possible protection to carry out their duties, in third countries. They shall form part of the local or regional cooperation networks of Member States' liaison officers set up pursuant to Council Regulation No 377/2004. Liaison officers shall only be deployed to third countries in which border management practices respect minimum human rights standardfully respect fundamental rights and international protection obligations, including in border management practices. Priority for deployment should be given to those third countries, which on the basis of risk analysis constitute a country of origin or transit regarding illegal migration. On a reciprocal basis the Agency may receive liaison officers posted by those third countries also, for a limited period of time. The Management Board shall adopt, on a proposal of the Executive Director, the list of priorities on a yearly basis in accordance with the provisions of Article 24.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 227 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. The tasks of the liaison officers shall include, in compliance with European Union law and in accordance with fundamental rights, with special regard to the right of everyone to leave a country, including his or her own, and international protection obligations, with special regard to respect for the principle of non-refoulement, the establishment and maintaining of contacts with the competent authorities of the third country to which they are assigned to with a view to contribute to the prevention of and fight against illegalrregular immigration and the return of illegal migrants.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 231 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. The Agency may benefit from Union funding in accordance with the provisions of the relevant instruments supporting the Union's external relations policy, except the funds for development cooperation, including the European Neighbourhood Policy and instruments for Stability. It may launch and finance technical assistance projects in third countries regarding matters covered by this Regulation. The Agency may also invite representatives of third countries, other European Union agencies and bodies or intshall ensure that assistance to opernational organisations to participate in its activities referred to in Articles 3, 4 and 5. Ts within the framework of these projects is not provided to third countries where thesre arep resentatives shall receive the appropriate training from the Agency prior to their participationasons to believe that such operations could lead to violations of fundamental rights.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 235 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 5
5. When concluding bilateral agreements with third countries as referred to in Article 2 (2) Member States shall, where appropriate, include provisions concerning the role and competencies of the Agency, in particular regarding the exercise of executive powers by members of the teams deployed by the Agency during the activities referred to in Article 3. The text of these bilateral agreements shall be transmitted to the European Parliament and the Commission, in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 237 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 6
6. The Agency may cooperate with the authorities of third countries competent in matters covered by this Regulation in the framework of working arrangements concluded with these authorities, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty., and in particular of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and international law, with special regard to compliance with the non-refoulement principle. Those arrangements shall guarantee compliance with international human rights and humanitarian law by third countries. A human rights assessment, including of the right to seek asylum, shall be carried out prior to the conclusion of such working arrangements and shall be reported to the European Parliament and the Commission
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 242 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 7
7. The activities referred to in paragraphs 2 and 6 shall be subject to receiving a prior favourable opinion of the Commission. The European Parliament shall be informed in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union at all stages of any working arrangements that the Agency concludes with the authorities of third countries.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 244 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 15 – paragraph 1
(16a) In Article 15, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "The Agency shall be a body of the Union. It shall have legal personality."
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 245 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 19 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 19 – paragraph 1
(19a) In Article 19, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. The contractual liability of the Agency shall be governed by the law applicable to the contract in question. All contracts shall include a human rights clause."
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 246 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 19 b (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 19 – paragraph 3
(19b) In Article 19, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: "3. In the case of non-contractual liability, the Agency shall be held liable and, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States, make good any damage caused by its departments or by its servants in the performance of their duties."
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 254 #

2010/0039(COD)

Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 23
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 33 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. The evaluation shall include a specific analysis onf the way in which the rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights wasere respected pursuant to the application of the Regulationis Regulation. That analysis shall be carried out in cooperation with the Fundamental Rights Agency, and include the participation of UNHCR and non-governmental organisations with relevant expertise. An annual evaluation of that analysis shall be annexed to the Agency's general report.
2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2009/2241(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines also that the EU accession to the ECHR will imply a competence of the ECtHR on all aspects of EU law and legislation, in particular in the field of Justice and Home Affairs, including its external dimension;
2010/03/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2009/2241(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that EU accession to the ECHR will provide the Union’s citizens with an additional mechanism for enforcing theirhuman rights, namely the possibility of lodging a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in relation to an act or failure to act by an EU institution or a Member State implementing EU law and falling at the same time within the remit of the ECHR. Stresses, however, that this does not alter the present system of jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ), and that the requirement that all domestic judicial remedies should have been exhausted will remain the condition for the eligibility of any application. Reminds that a complaint in certain cases may relate to acts performed or producing effect outside the Union's territory;
2010/03/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2009/2241(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 – indent 1
- the fact that the scope of the accession should be precisely defined in the mandate; the EU should also accede, at the least, to all those Additional Protocols to the ECHR which complement the rights enshrined in the ECHR and which have already been ratified by all the EU Member States, thus forming part of the EU’s human rights corpus. Furthermore, the accession to the revised European Social Charter shouldare already enshrined by EU law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and so applicable to the EU. In consequence, the accession to the revised European Social Charter and other relevant Council of Europe human rights treaties must be taken into consideration;
2010/03/29
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 8 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas, in a multipolar world, only large regional blocsthe processes of regional integration will be in a position to play a leading role and to cope with social, cultural, economic, environmental and political challenges,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 24 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) is a means of boosting the regional and multilateral dimension of Euro-Mediterranean relations, opening up freshrevitalising prospects for the establishment of an area of peace, security and prosperity for 800 million people,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the Barcelona process which represents a strong commitment to regional stability and the promotion of democracy and human rights, has been the central instrument for Euro- Mediterranean relations since 1995 and must remain at the core of these relations; pointing out in this sense that the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) has to be seen as a process aiming at re- invigorating the Barcelona process,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 32 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the neighbourhood policy conducted with the Mediterranean countries has its limitations and, by placing the emphasis on bilateral relations, is proving imbalanced and unable to contribute to a shared process of significant reform in the region, by placing the emphasis on the deepening of bilateral relations and the strengthening of the political dialogue and of which the goals are based on the mutually recognized acceptance of common values, such as democracy, rule of law, good governance and respect for human rights could be a valuable tool to promote reforms; whereas however the neighbourhood policy is proving imbalanced and unable to contribute to a shared process of significant reform in the region partly due to the incapacity of EU Member States to develop a coherent and credible policy based on the respect of ENP common commitments,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 42 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. having regard to the significant growing disparities between European Union Member States and Mediterranean third countries and the worrying structural problems of a socio-economic and institutional nature, which call for strong common responses in the shared interest of all the states participating in the UfM;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 45 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G
G. whereas the regional context in which the UfM is taking shape continues to be characterised by conflicts and political tensions, which have undermined and slowed down its establishment since the Paris Summit of July 2008,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 48 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas the resumption of the peace- process in the Middle East and the concrete prospects of a lasting comprehensive solution are of the utmost importance for the development of the Euro-Mediterranean relations and the functioning and the implementation of the projects of the Union for the Mediterranean,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 58 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J
J. whereas Mediterranean regions are directly affected by cross-border problems and transnational issues such as water management, pollution, road and maritime networks and migration flows, and whereas local and regional authorities play a key role in facilitating the development of sustainable spatial planning policies and the participation of all the stake-holders and the implementation of practical projects,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 69 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital L
L. having regard to the crucial importance of the capital flows represented by the funds migrants send to people in countries on the southern shore of the Mediterranean and to the role that migrants play in the intercultural dialogue between the two shores,
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 82 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the governments of the UfM member countries to establish an ongoing and opendeeply revise, step up and enhance the ongoing political dialogue characterised by; stresses that mutual respect and understanding, are fundamental elements of this dialogue and reaffirms its desirewill to see the promotion of democracy and respect for human rights and individual and collective freedoms made the central focus of that dialogue;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 90 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers in this regard that the Euro-Mediterranean partnership has not led to the expected results in the field of human rights and democracy; stresses therefore the necessity to deeply revise the functioning of the ENP which should link the effective implementation of the ENP common values enshrined in the bilateral Action Plans with the deepening of the relations with partner countries and to further strengthen the implementation of the existing mechanisms such as the human rights clause of the association agreements by defining an enforcement mechanism of that clause;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 97 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Is of the opinion that political tensions and regional conflicts in the Mediterranean basin must not hinder tangible progress towards multilateral cooperation in specific sectors, while recognising that there can be no real regional cooperation without a fair and lasting solution to the conflict in the Middle East, and that it is especially through the implementation of major integration projects that the UfM will help to develop a climate of trust conducive to pursuing common security goals in a spirit of solidarity and peace;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 126 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 - point 7 a (new)
- ensuring the involvement and the dialogue with all the stakeholders (local authorities and Civil Society Organisations) in the decision-making process concerning the major projects;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 176 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Recalls that depollution is one of the 6 priority areas of UfM; points out, in this regard, that all the projects should be planned and carried out in cooperation with existing programmes with regard, in particular, to the UNEP Mediterranean Action Plan for the Barcelona Convention;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 181 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Emphasises the strategic importance of issues such as agriculture, food security, adaptation to Climate change, water and rural development in Mediterranean countries, and calls for cooperation in the farming sector to be made a political priority; encourages the UfM member countries to work on harmonising their positions in the context of WTO negotiations and to move towards greater convergence among Euro- Mediterranean agricultural policies with regard, in particular, to the development and support for regional markets;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 187 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls the high potential of sources of renewable energy in the Euro- Mediterranean region with regard, in particular, to solar energy; calls for a plan promoting the widespread use of solar energy and the support of small scale-projects aimed at meeting the basic needs of local communities; points out that large-scale projects such as the Desertec project, which aims to connect several large solar thermal power plants as well as other renewable energy plants (wind farms) to each other and to the grid that supplies electricity to North Africa, Europe and the Middle East in order to meet a large part of the energy needs of the producer countries and provide 15% (initially) of Europe’s electricity needs, should first of all address the primary needs of the host countries;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 193 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Regrets, in this regard, the aggressive policy of promotion of nuclear energy in the Mediterranean partner countries carried out by the French government that could deeply undermine the non proliferation initiatives of the EU;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 205 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the EU Member States and the European Commission to make specific lots of Erasmus Mundus available to the Mediterranean countries and to provide facilities to ensure the quality and comparability of higher education and provide greater support for cooperation between universities;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 208 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Considers that the establishment of a stronger Euro-Mediterranean partnership is inseparable from facilitating freedom of movement between the two shores; takes the view that, in accordance with the recommendations of the United Nations Development Programme, this freedom of movement cannot be restricted only to business, work and study visas; requests, therefore, that the Member States and the Commission take any necessary measures to guarantee the right to mobility for the populations of our Mediterranean partners;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 220 #

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Pays tribute to the valuable work done by women organisations in the Euro-Mediterranean partner countries in supporting and promoting public campaigns aimed at improving the situation of women and considers it as fundamental to strengthen the dialogue between governmental entities and civil society organisations, including their involvement in the preparation of and their participation in all Euro-Med/UfM summits, ministerial conferences and meetings;
2010/03/31
Committee: AFET
Amendment 6 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5
– having regard to the Commission cCommunication onStrategy for the effective implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, by the European Union1, 1 COM(2010)0573.
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 9 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6
– having regard to all the related conventions and recommendations of the Council of Europe and the United Nations in the area of fundamental rights, including specialised monitoring bodies,
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on values such as respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities; whereas the effective safeguarding of rights has to be an overall objective of all European policies and an essential condition of the consolidation of the European AFSJ, irrespective of EU citizenship,
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 24 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Calls on all European Union institutions to build on the new institutional and legal framework created by the Lisbon Treaty to devise an ambitious and comprehensive internal human rights policy for the Union that goes beyond an approach to human rights based on lines of competence between EU and Member States; this policy should ensure that accountability mechanisms are available at EU level to address persisting fundamental rights violations across Member States, such as the lack of EU accountability for torture;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 27 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Draws attention to its resolutions, as well as its oral questions with debates, and findings from missions and country visits in 2009 and 2010 on specific fundamental rights such as privacy, personal dignity and data protection, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and information, press freedom, non-discrimination and the use of minority languages, on Roma issues, on discrimination against same-sex marriages, and on the illegal detention of prisoners; stresses that all these resolutions reflect the spirit of the Charter, showon protection of asylum seekers and migrants, on the respect of non- refoulement, on prison conditions including immigration related detention and on the illegal transfer of prisoners in the context of the CIA rendition and secret detention programme, including kidnapping, illegal detention, torture and ill-treatment; stresses its clear commitment to the everyday protection of fundamental rights of all individuals living in the EU, and sends political messages towards European citizens, Member States and the EU institutions;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 44 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
2. Considers it necessary to reflect on developments in relation to the protection of fundamental rights in the post-Lisbon period and, in that context, intends this resolution to clarify the role that each institution and mechanism should play in the new European architecture of fundamental rights; this includes the role of Parliament to follow-up on its resolutions related to fundamental rights issues in the European Union;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 47 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates that the legal achievements since the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009 have fundamentally changed the face of the EU, which is establishing itself increasingly as a political community of shared values,; theus welcomes three new pillars of themulti-leveled EU system of fundamental rights having thus become:protection that emanates from multiple sources and is enforced through a variety of mechanisms, including the legally binding Charter; the rights guaranteed by the ECHR, recognition of which flows from the Union's obligation to accede; and the rights based on the Member States‘ constitutional traditions and their interpretation according to the jurisprudence of the ECtHR and the CJ;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 51 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Reaffirms that the Charter represents the most modern codification of fundamental rights, offering a good balance between rights and solidarity and encompassing civil, political, economic and social rights as well as ‘third generation’ rights (i.e. the rights to good administration, a healthy environment and consumer protection); regrets that two Member States have opted for a limited national effect of the Charter and that another Member State has been allowed to join them;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 56 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that the incorporation of the Charter into primary EU law, while not extending the Union's competences, creates new responsibilities for the decision- making and implementing institutions, as well as for Member States when implementing EU legislation domestically, and that the Charter's provisions have thus become directly enforceable by European and national courts; calls on the EU institutions and Member States to increase coherence among their various bodies responsible for monitoring and implementation, with a view to effective application of the established comprehensive framework; to reinforce a cross-EU monitoring mechanism, as well as an early warning system through the Fundamental Rights Agency, civil society and UN mechanisms, such as the Universal Periodic Review;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 63 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that promotion of respect for the core values of the EU constitutes common ground in the Union's relations with third countries, and stresses that the Charter is applicable in this regard; underlines the fact that, within the new institutional structure of the EU, the European External Action Service (EEAS) offers an opportunity to enhance coherence and effectiveness in the sphere of external policy, and therefore calls for a human- rights-based approach to the service's structure, resources and activity; in this regard calls upon the EU to maintain coherence between its internal and external human rights policy and mechanisms, in order to ensure its credibility in international fora;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on all the Member States of the EU and of the Council of Europe to express their clear political commitment to, and their will to support, the accession process and agreement; calls on the Commission to finalise its internal consultations, as well as the negotiations with the Council of Europe, by finding adequate solutions to the main technical questions in order to complete the accession process, for the benefit of citizensensure the highest possible level of protection of human rights in Europe, including a broad remit for the ECtHR’s scrutiny over EU action, access to justice and relevant procedural guarantees for applicants without discrimination, within a reasonable time limit;.
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to raise awareness of the benefits of accession to the ECHR and of the requirements to be fulfilled, by developing guidelines on the adequate application and the effects of this additional mechanism so that excessive expectations on the part of EU citizens can be avoided;, and by including it in the compulsory training of all relevant professionals.
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes, furthermore, the new generhorizontal obligations created by the Treaty of Lisbon to combat social exclusion and discrimination and to promote social justice and protection, equality of women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child, as well as its explicit reference to persons belonging to minorities, which reflects another founding value of the Union; also welcomes the fact that the Union has acquired legal personality allowing it to accede to international treaties, the improvement in judicial protection with the extension of the jurisdiction of the CJ to areas of obvious relevance to the protection of fundamental rights, such as police and judicial cooperation in the field of criminal law, the strengthened role of the European Parliament and national parliaments in the European decision-making process, especially in evaluating the implementation of EU policy in the AFSJ, and the increased role of European citizens, now invested with the power to initiate EU legislation through the European Citizens‘ Initiative, and the institutional obligation to maintain an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society (Article 11(2) TEU);
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for full and consistent implementation of the Stockholm Programme in compliance with international and European human rights law and the jurisprudence of the ECtHR, which converts the obligations and principles deriving from the Treaty into practice by setting the strategic guidelines for the AFSJ; recalls that the AFSJ extends to all persons living under EU jurisdiction regardless of EU citizenship;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 92 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the European institutions have often acted in parallel in the field of protection of fundamental rights and therefore calls for reflection on actions taken and for enhanced cooperation among these institustablished interinstitutional cooperation that includes accountability mechanisms among these institutions; underlines the obligation under Article 218(10) TFEU for the European Parliament to be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure regarding international agreements between the Union and third countries or international organisations;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 95 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the creation of a new ‘Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship’ portfolio within the Commission as an indication of its commitment to step up its efforts in the area of fundamental rights and freedoms and as a positive response to Parliament's repeated requests in this regard; regrets that the division between justice and security (including migration) might reinforce the misconceived dichotomy between the need to protect the human rights of all people and the need to guarantee their security;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Expects concrete actions by the new Commissioner responsible, in line with already declared intentions: to introduce a fundamental-rights impact assessment of all new legislative proposals; to oversee the legislative process to ensure that emerging final texts comply with the Charter; and to apply a ‘zero tolerance’ policy on violations of the Charter, initiating infringement proceedings when there are good grounds for doing sofor non- compliance with the Charter; regrets that this was not explicitly envisaged in the recent case of expulsions of Roma by France in summer 2010; calls upon the Commissioner as well as all EU institutions to make relevant use of Article 7 TEU;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 105 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Reminds the Commission to monitor all new legislative proposals for compliance with the Charter, and to check existing instruments in this respect; suggests that the impact assessments accompanying Commission proposals should clearly indicate whether such proposals comply with the Charter, so that this consideration becomes an integral part of the bringing forward of legislative proposals; recalls the Commission of its explicit task to involve parties concerned by broad consultations in order to ensure coherence and transparency in the Union's actions (Article 11(3) TEU); underlines in this regard the importance of the FRA Platform as a significant resource for fulfilling this task;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Reminds the Commission to undertake objective investigations and start infringement proceeding if there are good grounds for doing so, thus avoiding double standards, whenever a Member State, in implementing EU legislation, violates the rights enshrined in the Charter; further reminds the Commission to request that Member States provide reliable data and factscross check the information with non- governmental sources, as well as to request the FRA and other human rights bodies for input;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 114 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises the importance of the Commission's annual monitoring of compliance with the Charter, and notes that its monitoring reports should contain an assessment of the implementation of the variousguaranteed rights and existing protection gaps at national and EU level, an evaluation of the most contentious issues and of the situation of the most vulnerable groups in the Union and identification of key trends and structural problems, with a view to proposing concrete initiatives and measures at EU level for prevention and redress of fundamental rights violations; calls upon the Commission to systematically invite the European Economic and Social Committee to give an opinion on the report; recommends the dissemination of good practices to the Member States;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 122 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to enforce the values and principles enshrined in the Treaty and Charter and the strategy set out in the Stockholm Programme through concrete legislative proposals while having regard to the jurisprudence of the ECtHR when carrying out these activities; furthermore, calls for the ‘Lisbonisation’ of the current acquis in the field of police and judicial cooperation and for a strengthening of democratic accountability in the AFSJ;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 124 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Suggests thatestablishing a working relationship between the Commissioner responsible for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship be invited regularly to the meetings of itsand the Committee of Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, by regularly inviting the Commissioner to exchange views on current issues and developments related to fundamental rights, in the form of an ongoing dialogue;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 130 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Calls on the Council to adapt to the changes required by the Treaty and to comply with the Charter when legislating; therefore welcomes the establishment of a standing Working Party on Fundamental Rights, Citizens Rights and Free Movement of Persons and hopesunderlines the importance that this new body will works transparently and efficiently, also when relating to the European Parliament;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 136 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Calls on the Council to ensure that the Council Working Party on Fundamental Rights, Citizens Rights and Free Movement of Persons has a broad mandate, including but not limited to discussing and responding officially to reports of the FRA, discussing and reporting on implementation of recommendations of UN treaty bodies, special procedures and mechanisms; assessing the external human rights impact of internal EU instruments and policies together with the Council Human Rights Working Group (COHOM); ensuring coordination with agencies with a human rights impact (e.g. EIB or FRONTEX); examining EU and Member States signature, ratification and compliance with international human rights instruments; and generally providing a forum for Council exchanges on internal human rights matters;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for enforcement of its democratic scrutiny based on the treaties; insists on the necessity of enhancing transparency and access to documents between EU institutions, in order to develop more effective interinstitutional cooperation on matters related to fundamental rights; underlines its role in evaluating the work of other EU institutions and holding them accountable for their action or inaction when assessing developments in the field (e.g. through annual reports), combining as it does political messages with a facts- based approach;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 142 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on the EU to ensure full legal accountability of its agencies with regard to fundamental rights violations, giving particular attention to FRONTEX;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 145 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Reaffirms the fact of the CJ's enhanced role in ensuring that all institutions and Member States implementing EU law apply the Charter accordingly, and notes that this will enable the CJ to develop its case law on fundamental rights; stresses the need for enhancstablished cooperation between national courts, the CJ and the ECtHR in furthering the development of a coherent system of case law in the field;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 152 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
23. Emphasises that the FRA constitutes ae FRA's role to guarantee of the congoingtinued protection of fundamental rights within the Union and that it should therefore; thus the FRA should have adequate resources for its increased tasks following the implementation of the Charter; points out that its monitoring role should extend to the acceding countries; reiterates its request to be fully associated in revising the multi- annual programme of the FRA; calls on the FRA to continue providing analysis and recommendations on the fundamental rights implications of the Lisbon Treaty;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 157 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the EU decision-making institutions to use the data and facts provided by the FRA during the preparatory stage of legislative activity and, in decision-making and/or monitoring processes and to be in constant and close cooperation with the FRA, while involving its NGO Platform;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 161 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines the fact that the EU and the Member States share competence in the field of human and fundamental rights, in their respective spheres of responsibility, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, and that; this shared competence represents both an opportunity and a right,should not be interpreted as as well as an obligation on the part of the Member Stateay to avoid action at EU or national level as regards fundamental rights commitments; highlights the enhanced role of the national parliaments provided by the Treaty of Lisbon and supports the establishment of a formal ongoing dialogue between the European Parliament and national parliaments;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 163 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Emphasises the importance of the judiciary bodies in the Member States, which play a primary role in the enforcement of human rights, and therefore suggests the provision ofurges supporting easy access to the courts and proceedings of a reasonable time limit as a means of strengthening the protection of fundamental and human rights; urges the Member States to invest effort in the ongoing training of national judges on fundamental rights and freedoms, including the new aspects in the field after the Lisbon Treaty;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 169 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to redouble their efforts to raise awareness, as fundamental rights can be protected more effectively if citizenindividuals themselves are aware of their rights; calls for active use of the experience of civic bodies and relevant NGOs and for the maintenance of an ongoing working relationship with all such bodies in implementing the new architecture of fundamental rights and in taking action on specific cases;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 174 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the EU institutions to exploit the full potential of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Council of Europe and the EU, in the interests of greater synergy and consistency at European level, and suggests that better use be made of the expertise of the human- rights monitoring mechanisms, standards and findings developed by Council of Europe, thus avoiding duplication of work; reaffirms the need for the Union to be more involved in the work of the Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 180 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
31. Calls on the EU Member States to sign up to, and ratify, the core Council of Europe and United Nations human-rights conventions and the additional optional protocols: among others, the European Social Charter, the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; furthermore, suggests that, in the European legislative process, more account be taken of international documents and more reference made to themthe UN Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, the Council of Europe Convention on Action against trafficking in human beings, the UN Convention on organised crime and its two protocols against human trafficking and smuggling, the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the up-coming Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence; furthermore, suggests that, in the European legislative process, more account be taken of international documents and more reference made to them; to this end welcomes the inclusion of an Annex in FRA's Annual report, to be updated in each subsequent annual report, indicating the current state of play regarding the ratification by Member States of international human rights instruments, namely conventions of the UN and agreements of the Council of Europe;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 183 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Stresses the need for appropriate attention to the various UN monitoring mechanisms and to the findings of the UN human-rights bodies, and suggests that their recommendations relevant to Member States be followed closely; points out the importance of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the United Nations Human Rights Council; recommends cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the office of the High Commissioner for Refugees of the United Nations; and welcomes the opening, in Brussels, of the first European Regional Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 185 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Calls on Member States sitting in the United Nations Security Council to ensure procedural rights guarantees in the listing and de-listing process of alleged terrorist groups or persons, as required by relevant CJ case law;
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 192 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 – introductory part
35. Recalls, therefore, all its resolutions and debates, as well as findings from missions and country visits on fundamental-rights issues in 2009 and 2010, which have shown that there are many outstanding issues and specific cases of violation of fundamental rights, which require urgent steps, mid- term strategies and long-term solutions; such acalls for an open assessment on the follow-up of all the resolutions by all EU institutions, as a concrete step forward, on the following indicative list of issues:
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 200 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 – indent 2
– protecting data and privacy, including transfer and storage of financial and personal data, and promot; requests the Council and the Commission to fully respect fundamental rights ing the rfight balance between individual freedoms and collective security challenged by new forms of terrorisagainst terrorism, notably by answering Parliament's demand for transparency and victim reparation in the context of the CIA rendition and secret detention program,
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 214 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 – indent 5
– developing EU strategy on the rights of the child through practical measures to combat child abuse, sexual exploitation and child pornographyabuse material, to promote safer use of the internet and to eliminate child labour and child poverty,
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 223 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 – indent 6
– prohibiting and eliminating all forms of discrimination against a large number of minoritiesin all areas of life, by enacting relevant EU wide legislation,
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 241 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 – indent 7 a (new)
– evaluating the existing EU readmission agreements and assessing the fundamental rights impact of the EU policy on readmission agreements,
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 253 #

2009/2161(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 – indent 8 a (new)
– protecting the freedom of expression, and the freedom and independence of all media and press,
2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
(18) In the interests of a correct recognition of those persons in need of protection as refugees within the meaning of Article 1 of the Geneva Convention or as persons eligible for subsidiary protection, every applicant should have an effective access to procedures, the opportunity to cooperate and properly communicate with the competent authorities so as to present the relevant facts of his/her case and sufficienteffective procedural guarantees to pursue his/her case throughout all stages of the procedure. Moreover, the procedure in which an application for international protection is examined shouldmust normally provide an applicant at least with the right to stay pending a decision by the determining authority and, in the case of a negative decision, the time necessary for seeking a judicial remedy, access to the services of an interpreter for submitting his/her case if interviewed by the authorities, the opportunity to communicate with a representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and with organizations providing advice or counselling to applicants for international protection , the right to appropriate notification of a decision, a motivation of that decision in fact and in law, the opportunity to consult a legal adviser or other counsellor, and the right to be informed of his/her legal position at decisive moments in the course of the procedure, in a language he/she can reasonably be supposed to understand and, in the case of a negative decision, the right to an effective remedy before a court or tribunal.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 63 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
(20) In addition, special procedural guarantees for vulnerable applicants, such as minors, unaccompanied minors, pregnant women, persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious acts of violence or disabled persons, should be laid down in order to create the conditions necessary for their effective access to procedures and presenting the elements needed to substantiate the application for international protection.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 65 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
(22) With a view to ensuring substantive equality between female and male applicants, examination procedures should be gender sensitive. In particular, personal interviews should be organised in a way which makes its possible for both female and male applicants to speak about their past experiences in cases involving gender based persecution to an interviewer of the same sex if so requested, who has specific training on the issue of interviews regarding gender based prosecution. The complexity of gender related claims should be properly taken into account in procedures based on the safe third country concept, the safe country of origin concept or the notion of subsequent applications.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
(24) Procedures for examining international protection needs should be organised in a way that makes it possible for the competentdetermining authorities to conduct a rigorous examination of applications for international protection.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 69 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
(25) Where an applicant makes a subsequent application without presenting new evidence or arguments, it would be disproportionate to oblige Member Statdetermining authorities to carry out a new full examination procedure. In these cases, Member Statthe determining authorities should be able to dismiss an application as inadmissible in accordance with the res judicata principle.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 26
(26) Many applications for international protection are made at the border or in a transit zone of a Member State prior to a decision on the entry of the applicant. Member StatDetermining authorities should be able to provide for admissibility and/or substantive examination procedures which make it possible to decide on applications made at the border or in transit zones at those locations.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 71 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 27
(27) A key consideration for the well- foundedness of an application for international protection is the safety of the applicant in his/her country of origin. Where a third country can be regarded as a safe country of origin, Member States should be able to designate it as safe and presume its safety for a particular applicant, unless he/she presents counter- indications.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 72 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
(28) Given the level of harmonisation achieved on the qualification of third country nationals and stateless persons as refugees, common criteria for designating third countries as safe countries of origin should be established.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 73 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29
(29) The designation of a third country as a safe country of origin for the purposes of this Directive cannot establish an absolute guarantee of safety for nationals of that country. By its very nature, the assessment underlying the designation can only take into account the general civil, legal and political circumstances in that country and whether actors of persecution, torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are subject to sanction in practice when found liable in the country concerned. For this reason, it is important that, where an applicant shows that there are valid reasons to consider the country not to be safe in his/her particular circumstances, the designation of the country as safe can no longer be considered relevant for him/her.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 75 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 30
(30) Member States should examine all applications on the substance, i.e. assess whether the applicant in question qualifies for international protection in accordance with Directive […/../EC] [the Qualification Directive] except where the present Directive provides otherwise, in particular where it can be reasonably asensumred that another country would do the examination or provide suaccessible and efficient protection. In particular, Member States should not be obliged to assess the substance of an application for international protection where a first country of asylum has granted the applicant refugee status or otherwise sufficient protection and the applicant will be readmitted to this country.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 76 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
(31) Member States should also not be obliged to assess the substance of an application for international protection where the applicant, due to a sufficient connection to a third country as defined by national law, can reasonably be expected to seek protection in that third country , and there are grounds for considering that the applicant will be admitted or re-admitted to that country . Member States should only proceed on this basis where this particular applicant would be safe in the third country concerned. In order to avoid secondary movements of applicants, common principles for the consideration or designation by Member States of third countries as safe should be established.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 78 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
(32) Furthermore, with respect to certain European third countries, which observe particularly high human rights and refugee protection standards, Member States should be allowed to not carry out, or not to carry out full examination of asylum applications regarding applicants who enter their territory from such European third countries.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 83 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point d
(d) ‘applicant with special needs’ means an applicant who due to age, gender, gender identity, disability, mental health problems or consequences of torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence is in need of special guarantees in order to benefit from the rights and comply with the obligations in accordance with this Directive;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 93 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. However, Member States may provide that another authority is responsible for the purpose of processing cases pursuant to Regulation (EC) No …/…. [the Dublin Regulation].deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 94 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Where an authority is designated in accordance with paragraph 3, Member States shall ensure that the personnel of that authority have the appropriate knowledge or receive the necessary training to fulfil their obligations when implementing this Directive.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 97 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1
8. Member States shall ensure that border guards, police and immigration authorities, and personnel of detention facilities have instructions and receive necessary training for dealing withaccepting and registering applications for international protection. If these authorities are designated as competent authorities pursuant to paragraph 1, the instructions shall include an obligation to register the application. In other cases, the instructions shall require to forward the application to the authority competent for this registrThe instructions shall then require the application to be forwarded to the authority competent for processing the registered application together with all relevant information.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 98 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide for free interpretation arrangements in order to ensure communication between persons who wish to make an application for international protection and border guards or personnel of detention facilities.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 102 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
3. Member States shall ensure that organizations providing advice and counseling to applicants for international protection have unobstructed access to the border crossing points, including transit zones, and detention facilities subject to an agreement with the competent authorities of the Member State.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 105 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Applicants shall be allowed to remain in the Member State, for the sole purpose of the procedure, until the determining authority has made a decision in accordance with the procedures at first instance set out in Chapter III. This right to remain shall not constitute an entitlement to a residence permit.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 3
3. A Member State may extradite an applicant to a third country pursuant to paragraph 2 only where the competentdetermining authorities are satisfiedcertain that an extradition decision will not result in direct or indirect refoulement in violation of international obligations of the Member State.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 113 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) the personnel examining applications and taking decisions are instructed and have the possibility to seek advice, whenever necessary, from experts on particular issues, such as medical, cultural, child or, gender or sexual orientation issues.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 116 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. Member States shall also ensure that, where an application is rejected with regard to refugee status and/or subsidiary protection status, the reasons in fact and in law are stated in the decision and information on how to challenge a negative decision is given in writing and signed upon receipt by the recipient.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 118 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States need not provide information on how to challenge a negative decision in writing in conjunction with a decision where the applicant has been provided with this information at an earlier stage either in writing or by electronic means accessible to the applicant.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 119 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Paragraph 3 shall not apply to cases where disclosure of particular circumstances of a person to members of his/her family can jeopardize the interests of that person, including cases involving gender, gender identity, sexual orientation and/or age based persecution. In such cases, a separate decision shall be issued to the person concerned.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 123 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) they shall be informed in a language which they may reasonably be supposed to understand of the procedure to be followed and of their rights and obligations during the procedure and the possible consequences of not complying with their obligations and not cooperating with the authorities. They shall be informed of the time-frame, as well as the means at their disposal for fulfilling the obligation to submit the elements as referred to in Article 4 of Directive […./../EC] [the Qualification Directive ]. This information shall be given in timesufficiently in advance in order to enable them to exercise the rights guaranteed in this Directive and to comply with the obligations described in Article 12;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 128 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Applicants for international protection shall cooperate, to the extent of their physical and psychological capacities, with the competent authorities with a view to establishing their identity and other elements referred to in Article 4(2) of Directive […./../EC] [the Qualification Directive]. Member States may impose upon applicants other obligations to cooperate with the competent authorities insofar as these obligations are necessary for the processing of the application.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 131 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) applicants are required to inform the competent authorities of their current place of residence or address and of any changes thereof as soon as possible. Member States may provide that the applicant shall have to accept any communication at the most recent place of residence or address which he/she indicated accordingly; the address of a civil society organisation may be used as a registration address;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 133 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the competent authorities may search the applicant and the items he/she carries with him/her, provided the search is carried out by a person of the same sex and fully respects the principle of human dignity and physical and mental integrity;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 134 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Before a decision is taken by the determining authority, the applicant shall be given the opportunity of a personal interview on his/her application for international protection in a language which he/she understands with a person competent under national law to conduct such an interview. Interviews on the substance of an application for international protection shall always be conducted by the personnel of the determining authority.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 135 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) the competentdetermining authority is of the opinion that the applicant is unfit or unable to be interviewed owing to enduring circumstances beyond his/her control. When in doubt, the competentdetermining authority shall consult a medical expert to establish whether the condition is temporary or permanent.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 136 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Where the Member Statedetermining authority does not provide the applicant with the opportunity for a personal interview pursuant to point (b), or where applicable, to the dependant, reasonable efforts shall be made tothe determining authority shall allow the applicant or the dependant to reschedule the personal interview and to submit further information.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 137 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The absence of a personal interview in accordance with this Article shall not prevent the determining authority from taking a decision on an application for international protection .deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 138 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) ensure that the person who conducts the interview is qualified, trained and competent to take account of the personal orand general circumstances surrounding the application, including the applicant's cultural origin, gender, sexual orientation or vulnerability;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) wherever possible, provide for the interview with the applicant to be conducted by a person of the same sex if the applicant concerned so requests;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 141 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) select a qualified, trained and competent interpreter who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person who conducts the interview. The communication need not necessarily take place in the language preferred by the applicant if there is another language which he/she understands and in which he/she is able to communicate clearly. Wherever possible, Member States shall provide an interpreter of the same sex if the applicant so requests;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 147 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that applicants have timelyimmediate access to the transcript and, where applicable, the report of the personal interview before the determining authority takes a decision.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 157 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States shall ensure that free legal assistance and/or representation be granted on request, subject to the provisions of paragraph 3in accordance with paragraph 1 be granted on request. To that end, Member States shall:
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 162 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) provide for free legal assistance in procedures in accordance with Chapter III. This shall include, at least, the provision of information on the procedure to the applicant in the light of his/her particular circumstances, assistance in the preparation or gathering of supporting documents, representation at all stages of the procedure, including at the personal interview, and explanations of reasons in fact and in law in the case of a negative decision;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 167 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) only to those who lack sufficient resources; and/ordeleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 168 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) only to legal advisers or other counsellors specifically designated by national law to assist and/or represent applicants for international protection.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 176 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 5
5. Member States mayshall allow and facilitate the provision by non- governmental organisations to provideof free legal assistance and/or representation to applicants for international protection in procedures provided for in Chapter III and/or Chapter V.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 177 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 7
7. Member States may demand to be reimbursed wholly or partially for any expenses granted if and when the applicant's financial situation has improved considerably or if the decision to grant such benefits was taken on the basis of false information supplied by the applicant.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 178 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that a legal adviser or other counsellor admitted or permitted as such under national law, and who assists or represents an applicant for international protection under the terms of national law, shall enjoy access to the information infull and immediate access to the applicant's file upon which a decision is or will be made.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 186 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) as soon as possibleimmediately take measures to ensure that a representative represents and assists the unaccompanied minor with respect to the lodging and the examination of the application. The representative shall be impartial and have the necessary expertise in the field of childcare. This representative can also be the representative referred to in Directive […/…/EC]17 [the Reception Conditions Directive];
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 187 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) ensure that the representative is given the opportunity to informs the unaccompanied minor about the meaning and possible consequences of the personal interview and, where appropriate, how to prepare himself/herself for the personal interview. Member States shall ensure that a representative and/or a legal advisor or other counsellor admitted as such under national law are present at that interview and have an opportunity to ask questions or make comments, within the framework set by the person who conducts the interview.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 197 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
5. Member States may use medical examinations to determine the age of unaccompanied minors within the framework of the examination of an application for international protection , where, following his/her general statements or other relevant evidence, Member States still have doubts concerning his/her age. In case of doubt; any decision shall be in favour of the minor.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 199 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Any medical examination shall be performed in full respect of the individual's dignity, selecting the most reliable and less invasive examinations.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 203 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22a Detention of minors The detention of minors shall be strictly prohibited in all circumstances.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 204 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Insofar as Member States provide for the possibility of explicit withdrawal of the application under national law, when an applicant explicitly withdraws his/her application for international protection , Member States shall ensure that the determining authority takes a decision to either discontinue the examination or reject the application, and explain to the applicant the consequences of the withdrawal.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 212 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. This Article shall be without prejudice to Regulation (EC) No …/…. [the Dublin Regulation].deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 213 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to have immediate access to applicants for international protection , including those in detention and in airport or port transit zones;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 214 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to have immediate and full access to information on individual applications for international protection , on the course of the procedure and on the decisions taken, provided that the applicant agrees thereto;
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 216 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) receive, upon his/her request, information on the reasons for the delay and the time-frame within which the decision on his/her application is to be expected.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 218 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Member StatThe determining authorities may prioritise an examination of an application for international protection in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees of Chapter II:
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 220 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – point c
(c) in other cases, including for environmental and/ or climate reasons, with the exception of applications referred to in paragraph 6.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 221 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6
6. Member States may provide that an examination procedure in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees of Chapter II be accelerated if: (a) the applicant, in submitting his/her application and presenting the facts, has only raised issues that are not relevant to the examination of whether he/she qualifies as a refugee or a person eligible for subsidiary protection by virtue of Directive […./../EC] [the Qualification Directive] ; or (b) the applicant is from a safe country of origin within the meaning of this Directive , or (c) the applicant has misled the authorities by presenting false information or documents or by withholding relevant information or documents with respect to his/her identity and/or nationality that could have had a negative impact on the decision; or (d) it is likely that, in bad faith, he/she has destroyed or disposed of an identity or travel document that would have helped establish his/her identity or nationality; or (e) the application was made by an unmarried minor to whom Article 6 (7) (c) applies, after the application of the parents or parent responsible for the minor has been rejected and no relevant new elements were raised with respect to his/her particular circumstances or to the situation in his/her country of origin; or (f) the applicant is making an application merely in order to delay or frustrate the enforcement of an earlier or imminent decision which would result in his/her removal.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 234 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 8
8. Member States shall lay down reasonable time limits for the adoption of a decision in the procedure at first instance pursuant to paragraph 6.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 236 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a country which is not a Member State is considered as a first country of asylum for the applicant, pursuant to Article 31;deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 237 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) a country which is not a Member State is considered as a safe third country for the applicant, pursuant to Article 32;deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 239 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2. Paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No …/…. [the Dublin Regulation].deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 240 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 1
A country can be considered to be a first country of asylum for a particular applicant for international protection if: (a) he/she has been recognised in that country as a refugee and he/she can still avail himself/herself of that protection; or (b) he/she otherwise enjoys sufficient protection in that country, including benefiting from the principle of non- refoulement; provided that he/she will be readmitted to that country.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 241 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 1 - point b
(b) he/she otherwise enjoys sufficient protection in that country, including benefiting from the principle of non- refoulement;deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 242 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 2
In applying the concept of first country of asylum to the particular circumstances of an applicant for international protection Member States may take into account Article 32 (1).deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 243 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 32
The safe third country concept 1. Member States may apply the safe third country concept only where the competent authorities are satisfied that a person seeking international protection will be treated in accordance with the following principles in the third country concerned: (a) life and liberty are not threatened on account of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion; (b) there is no risk of serious harm as defined in [Directive …./../EC] [the Qualification Directive]; (c) the principle of non-refoulement in accordance with the Geneva Convention is respected; (d) the prohibition of removal, in violation of the right to freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as laid down in international law, is respected; and (e) the possibility exists to request refugee status and, if found to be a refugee, to receive protection in accordance with the Geneva Convention. 2. The application of the safe third country concept shall be subject to rules laid down in national legislation, including: (a) rules requiring a connection between the person seeking international protection and the third country concerned on the basis of which it would be reasonable for that person to go to that country; (b) rules on the methodology by which the competent authorities satisfy themselves that the safe third country concept may be applied to a particular country or to a particular applicant. Such methodology shall include case-by-case consideration of the safety of the country for a particular applicant and/or national designation of countries considered to be generally safe; (c) rules in accordance with international law, allowing an individual examination of whether the third country concerned is safe for a particular applicant which, as a minimum, shall permit the applicant to challenge the application of the safe third country concept on the grounds that the third country is not safe in his/her particular circumstances. The applicant shall also be allowed to challenge the existence of a connection between him/her and the third country in accordance with point (a) .When implementing a decision solely based on this Article, Member States shall: 3. When implementing a decision solely based on this Article, Member States shall: (a) inform the applicant accordingly; and (b) provide him/her with a document informing the authorities of the third country, in the language of that country, that the application has not been examined in substance. 4. Where the third country does not permit the applicant for international protection to enter its territory, Member States shall ensure that access to a procedure is given in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees described in Chapter II. 5. Member States shall inform the Commission periodically of the countries to which this concept is applied in accordance with the provisions of this Article.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 249 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 33
National designation of third countries as safe countries of origin 1. Member States may retain or introduce legislation that allows, in accordance with Annex II, for the national designation of safe countries of origin for the purposes of examining applications for international protection . 2. new Member States shall ensure a regular review of the situation in third countries designated as safe in accordance with this Article. 3. The assessment of whether a country is a safe country of origin in accordance with this Article shall be based on a range of sources of information, including in particular information from other Member States, the European Asylum Support Office, the UNHCR, the Council of Europe and other relevant international organisations. 4. Member States shall notify to the Commission the countries that are designated as safe countries of origin in accordance with this Article.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 251 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 34
The safe country of origin concept 1. A third country designated as a safe country of origin in accordance with this Directive may, after an individual examination of the application, be considered as a safe country of origin for a particular applicant only if: (a) he/she has the nationality of that country; or (b) he/she is a stateless person and was formerly habitually resident in that country; (c) and he/she has not submitted any serious grounds for considering the country not to be a safe country of origin in his/her particular circumstances and in terms of his/her qualification as a refugee or a person eligible for subsidiary protection in accordance with [Directive …./../EC] [the Qualification Directive] . 2. Member States shall lay down in national legislation further rules and modalities for the application of the safe country of origin concept.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 261 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 9
9. Where a person with regard to whom a transfer decision has to be enforced pursuant to Regulation (EC) […/…] [the Dublin Regulation] makes further representations or a subsequent application in the transferring Member State, those representations or subsequent applications shall be examined by the responsible Member State, as defined in Regulation (EC) […/…] [the Dublin Regulation], in accordance with this Directive.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 264 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States may provide for procedures, in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees of Chapter II, in order for determining authorities to decide at the border or transit zones of the Member State on:
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 266 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a decision in the framework of the procedures provided for in paragraph 1 is taken within a reasonable time and as long as these third country nationals or stateless persons are accommodated normally at locations close to the border or transit zone. When a decision has not been taken within four weeks, the applicant shall be granted entry to the territory of the Member State in order for his/her application to be processed in accordance with the other provisions of this Directive.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 267 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38
The European safe third countries concept 1. Member States may provide that no, or no full, examination of the asylum application and of the safety of the applicant in his/her particular circumstances as described in Chapter II, shall take place in cases where a competent authority has established, on the basis of the facts, that the applicant for international protection is seeking to enter or has entered illegally into its territory from a safe third country according to paragraph 2. 2. A third country can only be considered as a safe third country for the purposes of paragraph 1 where: (a) it has ratified and observes the provisions of the Geneva Convention without any geographical limitations; (b) it has in place an asylum procedure prescribed by law; and (c) it has ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and observes its provisions, including the standards relating to effective remedies. 3. The Member States concerned shall lay down in national law the modalities for implementing the provisions of paragraph 1 and the consequences of decisions pursuant to those provisions in accordance with the principle of non- refoulement , including providing for exceptions from the application of this Article for humanitarian or political reasons or for reasons of public international law. 4. When implementing a decision solely based on this Article, the Member States concerned shall: (a) inform the applicant accordingly; and (b) provide him/her with a document informing the authorities of the third country, in the language of that country, that the application has not been examined in substance. 5. Where the safe third country does not re-admit the applicant for asylum, Member States shall ensure that access to a procedure is given in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees described in Chapter II.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 271 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
(b) where information on an individual case is collected for the purposes of reconsidering the international protection status, it is not obtained from the actor(s) of persecution or serious harm in a manner that would result in such actor(s) being directly or indirectly informed of the fact that the person concerned is a beneficiary of international protection whose status is under reconsideration, nor jeopardise the physical integrity of the person and his/her dependants, or the liberty and security of his/her family members still living in the country of origin.
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 277 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
6. In the case of a decision taken in the accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 27 (6) and of a decision to consider an application inadmissible pursuant to Article 29 (2) (d), and where the right to remain in the Member State pending the outcome of the remedy is not foreseen under national legislation, a court or tribunal shall have the power to rule whether or not the applicant may remain on the territory of the Member State, either upon request of the concerned applicant or acting on its own motion.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 286 #

2009/0165(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex II
Designation of safe countries of origin for the purposes of Article 33(1) A country is considered as a safe country of origin where, on the basis of the legal situation, the application of the law within a democratic system and the general political circumstances, it can be shown that there is generally and consistently no persecution as defined in Article 9 of Directive […./../EC] [the Qualification Directive], no torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and no threat by reason of indiscriminate violence in situations of international or internal armed conflict. In making this assessment, account shall be taken, inter alia, of the extent to which protection is provided against persecution or mistreatment by: (a) the relevant laws and regulations of the country and the manner in which they are applied; (b) observance of the rights and freedoms laid down in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and/or the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights and/or the Convention against Torture, in particular the rights from which derogation cannot be made under Article 15(2) of the said European Convention; (c) respect of the non-refoulement principle according to the Geneva Convention; (d) provision for a system of effective remedies against violations of these rights and freedoms.deleted
2011/01/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 4 #

2009/0155(NLE)

Draft opinion
last paragraph
The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on International Trade, as the committee responsible, to draw up an interim reportrefuse as it stands its consent to the proposal for a Council decision under Rule 81(31).
2012/04/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2009/0104(CNS)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
(3) For persons residing in Kosovo under UNSCR 1244/99 and persons whose citizenship certificate has been issued for the territory of Kosovo under UNSCR 1244/99, a specific Coordination Directorate in Belgrade will be in charge of collecting their passport applications and the issuance of passports. However, in view of security concerns regarding in particular the potential for illegal migration, the holders of Serbian passports issued by this specific Coordination Directorate (in Serbian : Koordinaciona uprava) should be excluded from the visa free regime for Serbia. In view of the fact that the border between Serbia and Kosovo is regarded by the Serbian authorities as an administrative boundary, which might negatively influence effective inter-state border controls, the Commission should request the Serbian government to implement at that border or boundary the same measures and controls it does at its other internationally recognised borders.
2009/10/15
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 17 #

2009/0098(COD)

Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 2
Regulation (EC) No 377/2004
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Representatives of the Commission, and the FRONTEX Agency established by Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 as well as international independent bodies such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) shall be entitled to participate in the meetings organised within the framework of the immigration liaison officers network, although, if required by operational considerations, meetings may be held in the absence of these representatives. Other bodies and authorities may also be invited, as appropriate.
2009/11/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 20 #

2009/0098(COD)

Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 377/2004
Article 6 – paragraph 1
1. The Member State holding the Presidency of the Council of the European Union or, if this Member State is not represented in the country or region, the Member State serving as acting Presidency shall draw up, by the end of each semester, a report to the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission on the activities of immigration liaison officers networks in specific regions and/or countries of particular interest to the European Union, as well as on the situation in those regions and/or countries, in matters relating to legal and illegal immigration, including a human rights based approach. The selection, following a consultation with the Member States, the European Parliament and the Commission, of the specific regions and/or countries of particular interest to the European Union shall be based on objective migratory indicators, such as statistics on legal and illegal migration, the situation of human rights and risk analyses prepared by the FRONTEX Agency, and shall be in line with overall EU external relations policy.
2009/11/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 22 #

2009/0098(COD)

Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 377/2004
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall, on the basis of the abovementioned reports, provide a factual summary to the Council and to the European Parliament, on an annual basis, on the development of the immigration liaison officers’ networks and an assessment of their activities, specifically regarding the protection of and respect for international human rights law.
2009/11/12
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 5 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for continued maximum vigilance as regards respect for the human rights clauses in the agreements signed by the EU and its third-country partners, and for such clauses to be included systematically in future agreements; points out that the human rights clause, by virtue of being an essential element, should apply to all the provisions of the agreement; reiterates its call for this clause to be systematically accompanied by a genuine enforcement mechanism;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that the report shows that the EU, despite the inquiries undertaken in some Member States, has not carried out an evaluation of Member States' practices in relation to the anti-terrorism policies followed by the US Administration under the Bush presidency; considers it essential to clarify the role of Member States implicated in cases of extraordinary rendition and urges, once again, full and complete compliance with international standards in the fight against terrorism;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 16 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Considers that the EU considerably weakens its capacity to promote respect for human rights every time it puts security or trade priorities ahead of respect for human rights;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 21 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Reiterates its request to the Commission to encourage European Union Member States, and third countries with which there are ongoing negotiations for future accession or for strengthening relations, to sign up to, and ratify, all core United Nations and Council of Europe human rights conventions and the optional protocols thereto and to cooperate with international human rights procedures and mechanisms; draws the attention of European Union Member States to, in particular, the need to ratify the 1990 International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and As of November 2008. Members of their Families, which none of the Member States has ratified to date1; 1 calls specifically for a framework agreement to be concluded between the European Union and UNHCR with a view to promoting the ratification and implementation of United Nations conventions by all Member States;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 48 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40a. Considers that necessary measures should be taken to ensure that human rights issues are followed in a more systematic way by the EU missions, for instance by appointing human rights focal points and including guidelines on human rights and their implementation in EU mission staff training programmes;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 52 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
42. Welcomes the ongoing elaboration of new guidelines aimed at the establishment of a comprehensive strategy for strengthening EU action to enhance women's security, especially in conflict- affected countries; is looking forward to receiving those guidelines as soon as they are adopted, and underlines tunderlines the importance of involving Parliament in drafting new guidelines and calls, in this regard, for a mechanism to be established importance of involving Parliament in drafting new guidelinesn future for consultation with Parliament both when the new guidelines are being drawn up and when they are being assessed and revised;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 54 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
43. Draws attention, nonetheless, to the existing gaps in the development of the Union's policies and actions for the human rights of women; finds these gaps reflected in the Council's report insofar as when assessing various specific areas it fails to go into detail; suggests that the Council should appoint an EU special envoy for women’s rights to strengthen its action in this area;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 70 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 a (new)
69a. Welcomes the establishment in 2006 by the ODIHR of a focal point for human rights defenders for the purpose of monitoring the human rights situation in all OSCE countries; urges the European Union institutions to strengthen their support for human rights defenders by creating a focal point in the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission with a view to improving the follow-up of individual cases and coordination with other international and European organisations;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 71 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 b (new)
69b. Welcomes the 2008 revised version of the EU Guidelines on human rights defenders; highlights the inclusion of provisions aimed at improving the support given to, and the protection of, human rights defenders by EU missions, such as local strategies for the implementation of the guidelines, local working groups on human rights and the organisation of meetings at least once a year between human rights defenders and diplomats; welcomes at the same time the inclusion of the possibility of issuing emergency visas and facilitating temporary shelter in the EU Member States as measures to provide swift assistance and protection to human rights defenders in danger in third countries;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 72 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70
70. Once again calls on the Council and the Member States to consider in concrete terms the matter of emergency visas for human rights defenders by including a clear reference to the specific situation of human rights defenders in the new Common Code on Visas, thereby creating a specific and accelerated visa procedure which could draw on the experience of the Irish and Spanish governments in this matter; notes the discussion concerning the issuing of visas for the temporary relocation of human rights defenders who are at immediate risk or in need of respite, and calls on COHOM to take further steps; considers that the confidentiality of European Union demarches in favour of human rights defenders is sometimes useful but asks that, despite that confidentiality, European Union local staff should always confidentially inform NGOs on the ground about such demarchystematically and confidentially provide all information concerning those demarches to the NGOs on the ground, to the human rights defenders and/or their families;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 79 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74
74. ONotes the revised version of the guidelines, adopted under the French Presidency, on human rights dialogues with third countries; once again calls on the Council and the Commission to initiate a comprehensive evaluation of those guidelines on human rights dialogues and, based on an in-depth evaluation of each dialogue and the results obtained and, to that end, to develop clear indicators for the impact of each dialogue and criteria for the initiation, cessation and resumption of dialogues; emphasises the need to continue the informal interinstitutional meetings before and after each dialogue with a view to increasing the exchange of information between institutions and, if necessary, improving coordination; points out, in this regard, that the adoption of human rights strategies on a country-by-country basis will help to improve the coherence of EU policy on human rights;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 82 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76
76. Regrets China's postponement of the ninth China-EU summit on the grounds of the Dalai Lama's visit to Europe; emphasises the need for a radical intensification of the European Union- China human rights dialogue; expresses its disquiet at the serious human rights violations in China and stresses that, despite promises made by the regime before the Olympic Games in August 2008, the situation on the ground regarding human rights has not improved; notes that, despite repeated assurances by the Chinese government of its intention to ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratification is still pending; refers to its resolution of 17 January 2008 on the arrest of the Chinese dissident Hu Jia, who has been awarded the 2008 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought; calls on the Chinese government to release Hu Jia immediately and to lift the house arrest on his wife Zeng Jinyan and his daughter; condemns the wave of repression against signatories of the ‘Charter 08’, a document calling for democratic reforms in China and demanding the release of Liu Xiaobo, a dissident who has been detained since 9 December 2008; remains concerned about many aspects of Chinese legislation, including the State Secrets system, preventing the transparency necessary for the development of good governance and a system in which the rule of law prevails; in this context, deplores the systematic punishment of lawyers who try to make the Chinese legal system function in accordance with China's own laws and the rights of its citizens;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 83 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
78. Regrets the lack of results from the European Union-Russia consultations on human rights; regrets that the Russian authorities declined to participate in any of the round-table meetings held to prepare for the consultations which involved domestic and international NGOs; notes that during the consultations the European Union raised human rights concerns with a particular focus on freedom of expression and assembly, the functioning of civil society, minority rights, combating racism and xenophobia and the rights of children and women, as well as the international human rights obligations of both the EU and Russia; however, regrets that the European Union has not succeeded in bringing about any change of policy in Russia, particularly with regard to impunity and the independence of the judiciary, the treatment of human rights defenders and political prisoners including Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the independence of the media and freedom of expression, the treatment of ethnic and religious minorities, respect for the rule of law and human rights protection in the armed forces, discrimination based on sexual orientation as well as other issues; refers to its resolution of 19 June 2008 on the EU- Russia Summit of 26-27 June 2008 in Khanty-Mansiysk ; expresses once again its concerns at the deteriorating situation of human rights defenders and the difficulties faced by NGOs with regard to their registration and in carrying out their activities; reiterates its concerns about the Anti-Extremism Law, which could affect the free flow of information and could lead the Russian authorities to further restrict the right to free expression of independent journalists and political opponents; is strongly concerned about the recent murder of Stanislas Markelov and Anastasia Baburova and urges that killers of human rights defenders be brought to justice; expresses further concern, in line with the Amnesty International Report of 2008, as to the ongoing failure of the Office of the Prosecutor to respect the right of Mikhail Khodorkovsky and his associate Platon Lebedev to a fair trial in accordance with international standards, and joins the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in calling on the Russian authorities to "use all available legal means" to secure the release of Igor Sutiagin and Valentin Danilov; welcomes the release of Mikhail Trepashkin; deeply regrets that the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) election monitoring mission covering the Russian presidential election of March 2008 had to be cancelled due to the restrictions and limitations imposed by the Russian authorities on the election monitoring mission;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 86 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
79. UrgNotes the Council and the Commission to set up human rights subcommittees with all neighbourhood countries, and in particular with Israel, as part of the negotiations on an upgrading of the bilateral relations, and as expressed by both parties as a result of the Association Council on 16 June 2008; welcomes the first meeting of theexistence of human rights subcommittees involving countries on the southern shore of the Mediterranean (Morocco, Tunisia, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Israel and the Palestinian Authority) in the context of the European Neighbourhood Policy and calls on the Council and the Commission to set up human rights subcommittees with the Palestinian Authority on 2 December 2008; reiterates all neighbourhood countries; welcomes the consultation witsh call for parliamentarians to be associated with the preparations for meetings of such subcommittees and to be informed of their outcome; points out once again that, as in the case of Tunisia, the subcommittees' sessions might focus on establishing the durability of the subcommittee concerned and fostering trust and confidence amongst the partners; points outivil society, both before and after, by the Commission delegation in the country concerned and by the Commission’s relevant departments in Brussels; questions, however, the effectiveness and coherence of the methodology used, and, in particular, of the criteria for evaluating the discussions held in these subcommittees; believes that these subcommittee dealing with Morocco should eventually move towards a results- oriented phase, with the establishment of concrete benchmarks and indicators of progress, as well as the possibility of raising individual cases;s should allow the human rights issues included in the action plan to be specifically followed up but stresses that discussions on human rights should certainly not be confined to these subcommittees, and emphasises the importance of coordination with other subcommittees dealing with human rights- related issues, such as migration; highlights the need to include these issues in the political dialogue up to the highest level so as to increase the coherence of the EU's policy in this field and reduce discrepancies in statements on the human rights situation given by both sides to the press; is convinced that the European Neighbourhood Policy as designed and structured (action plan, follow-up report and subcommittees) could give real leverage for promoting human rights if the European Union showed a genuine political will to ensuring respect for the primacy of human rights in a coherent, systematic and wide-ranging manner; believes, therefore, that respect for human rights and democratic principles must be a pre- condition for strengthening relations between the Union and a third country; in the context of concluding a framework agreement with Libya, welcomes the opening of the negotiations and calls on the Council and the Commission to give due attention to dialogue and cooperation on human rights;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 90 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80
80. Recognises the second round of the EU-Uzbekistan human rights dialogue, which took place on 5 June 2008; notes the seminar on media freedom, held in Tashkent on 2 and 3 October 2008; however, considers that the seminar failed to achieve its aim of providing an open discussion on the human rights violations and freedom of the media in Uzbekistan, as was originally intended; notes the continuing absence of an independent international inquiry into the Andijan massacre and the lack of any improvement in the human rights situation in Uzbekistan; welcomes the release of two human rights defenders, Dilmurod Mukhiddinov and Mamarajab Nazarov; urges the Uzbek authorities to release all human rights defenders and other political prisoners; reiterates its deep concern at the imprisonment of Salijon Abdurakhmanov, an independent journalist, and Agzam Turgunov, a human rights activist; welcomeregrets the Council's Conclusions of 13 October 2008 on Uzbekistan; urges the Uzbek authorities to accept the accreditation of the new Country Director of Human Rights Watch and to allow that organisation to operate without hindrance; asks Uzbekistan to cooperate fully and effectively with the UN Special Rapporteurs on torture and on freedom of expression and to revoke restrictions on the registration and operation of NGOs in Uzbekistan; notes that the Council has decided not to renew the travel restrictions applying to certain individuals referred to in Common Position 2007/734/CFSP1, which had been suspended in accordance with the Council's conclusions of 15-16 October 2007 and 29 April 2008; welcomes the fact that the Council has however decided to renew, for a period of 12 months, the arms embargo imposed in Common Position 2007/734/CFSP; invites the Council and the Commission to review the overall human rights situation in Uzbekistan; reiterates its call for the immediate release of political prisoners2; 1 Council Common Position 2007/734/CFSP of 13 November 2007 concerning restrictive measures against Uzbekistan (OJ L 295, 14.11.2007, p. 34. 2 In particular: Nosim Isakov, Norboi Kholjigitov, Abdusattor Irzaev, Habibulla Okpulatov, Azam Formonov, Alisher Karamatov and Rasul Khudainasarov.notes the declaration by the EU Presidency of 17 December 2008 on individual cases; Or. fr
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 91 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
81. Welcomes the fact that the European Union and Turkmenistan held the first round of the human rights dialogue in July 2008; welcomes the raising of concerns about the human rights situation in Turkmenistan, particularly regarding freedom of opinion and assembly, the independence of the judiciary and the functioning of civil society; refers to its resolution of 20 February 2008 on an EU Strategy for Central Asia1 and reiterates that Turkmenistan must make progress in key areas in order for the EU to conclude the Interim Agreement, inter alia by allowing the International Committee of the Red Cross free and unfettered access, by reforming the education system in accordance with international standards, by unconditionally releasing all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, by abolishing all government impediments to travel, and by allowing all NGOs and human rights bodies to operate freely in the country and authorising access to them for all United Nations bodies;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 99 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108
108. Calls on the Commissionuncil and the Councilmmission to ensure the coherence of ESC rights in the EU's development, external trade and human rights policies, and, to that end, to set up an inter-service working group on ESC rights including the European Economic and Social Committee; points out, in that respect, that the human rights and democracy clause should be more explicitly worded in terms of its scope, on the basis of both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 103 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115
115. Reminds Parliament's delegations visiting third countries that they should systematically include in the agenda of their visits to third countries an interparliamean interparliamentary debate on the human rights situation, as well as meetings with human rights defenders, in order to learn first-hand about the human rights situation in the countary debate on the human rights situaconcerned and to provide them, where appropriate, with international visibility and protection;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 104 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115 a (new)
115a. Welcomes the setting up of the Sakharov Network, as announced on the 20th anniversary of the Sakharov Prize; believes that it should quickly decide on its operating arrangements and put in place the resources necessary to achieve its objectives, in particular, the opening of a Sakharov Office in Parliament, access to the European institutions and the issuing of a Sakharov passport;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 105 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115 b (new)
115b. Believes that a single, strengthened ‘human rights’ body in Parliament would be able to promote a coherent, effective, systematic and cross-cutting human rights policy within Parliament and vis-à-vis the Council and the Commission, particularly with regard to the foreign policy aspects of the Lisbon Treaty;
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 108 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas efforts must be made to focus greater attention on respect for basic human rights, in particular political rights, in the negotiation and implementation of bilateral or regional trade agreements, even those concluded with important trading partners,
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 110 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 28 a (new)
– having regard to the second report of the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights entitled “Human Rights Defenders in the OSCE Region: Challenges and Good Practices” of 15 December 2008,
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 111 #

2008/2336(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 30
– having regard to the European Union 1 Texts adopted, P6_TA(2009)0025. Guidelines on promoting compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL)1, on children and armed conflict and on human rights defenders, as well as on the death penalty, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, human rights dialogues with third countries and on promotion and protection of the rights of the child and on violence against women and the fight against all forms of discrimination against women,
2009/02/10
Committee: AFET
Amendment 19 #

2008/2236(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for the annual action programmes in the fields of democracy, the rule of law and human rights to be pursued more ambitiously in line with the objectives set up in the ENP Action Plans; believes that more should be done to persuade the partner governments to commit themselves to action in those fields;
2008/12/18
Committee: AFET
Amendment 21 #

2008/2236(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises the necessity to define clear, concrete and measurable objectives within all new ENP Action Plans under negotiation; underlines the necessary interdependence between all chapters of these Action Plans in view of moving forward towards progress in all chapters without discrimination; in this respect, reiterates its call for a global Human Rights and Democracy Policy gathering all existing instruments in this field;
2008/12/18
Committee: AFET
Amendment 29 #

2008/2236(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the need for a country-specific approach with regard to political conditionality; emphasises the importance of the independence of the judiciary as a factor underlying conditionality; considers therefore that an in-depth and thorough evaluation of all "Justice" projects financed under this instrument should be made public and be provided to the EP;
2008/12/18
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #

2008/2236(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the need for enhanced cooperation on the part of the ENPI countries with the EU agencies and increased opportunities for the ENPI countries to participate in the Community programmes, provided that the objectives of the ENP Action Plans have been fulfilled;
2008/12/18
Committee: AFET
Amendment 36 #

2008/2236(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Calls for greater emphasis to be placed on increased mobility and people-to-people contacts, particularly in the areas of education, research and development, business and political dialogue; supports urgent action to reduce visa fees for nationals and residents of all ENPI countries;
2008/12/18
Committee: AFET
Amendment 50 #

2008/2236(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. Takes the view that the recent geopolitical developments in the EU's Eastern neighbourhood underscore the importance of developing the ENP further by adapting it better to the needs of the partners, including an enhanced EU involvement in the Black Sea region and an ambitious Eastern Partnership; stresses the need to speed up, in relation to Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova in particular, the establishment of a free trade zone as soon as partner countries are ready and the need to finalise as soon as possible steps towards visa freedom with the EU; points out that the frozen conflicts represent an obstacle to the full development of the ENP with regard to the South Caucasus and calls on the Council to engage more actively in the conflict resolution;
2008/12/18
Committee: AFET
Amendment 63 #

2008/2236(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that the financial envelope for Belarus needs to be increased andreviewed to see whether cooperation can be broadened to cover areas beyond energy, the environment and migration, with a view to pursuing the policy of re-engagement initiated by the Council in September 2008; underlines the need for effective political conditionality and for guarantees that the assistance will have an immediate positive impact on citizens and will not be misused by the authorities against their political opponents;
2008/12/18
Committee: AFET
Amendment 1 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. BelievesTakes the view that the proposal ‘Barcelona Process: Union for the Mediterranean’ (BP:UfM), adopted by the Heads of State and Government at the Summit for the Mediterranean that took place in Paris on 13 July 2008, will constitutes a step towards economic and regional integration between the Mediterranean countries; welcomes if it is able to deliver on promises and yield concrete and visible results; points out that the opening-up to countries not involved in the partnership andenhances the possibilities of attaining the objective of establishing parity relations between the European Union and the Mediterranean partner countries and tackling the problems of the region in a comprehensive way;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 10 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Agrees with the decision to place the emphasis on a multilateral framework by pinpointing certain large-scale projects to be implemented using the new instruments under the BP:UfM; nevertheless highlights the lack of any strategies for economic or regional integration in the Mediterranean basin to support those projects and the role of local communities in this context;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Stresses that one of the weakest points of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership has been the lack of awareness of public opinion and the absence of involvement of local communities in the development of the process; therefore calls for further and more effective efforts to enhance the visibility of the BP:UfM, improve people- to-people contacts and increase the participation of local communities and civil society organisations in the definition and adoption of the proposed projects;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 38 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights the fact that some of the countries participating in the BP:UfM are not part of the Barcelona Process; calls on the Council, the Commission and all the States participating in the BP:UfM to maintain, in this connection, a cohesive framework of relations in which it is clear that the Union for the Mediterranean is an expression of that partnership process and that its purpose is economic and regional integration between the countries of the Mediterranean basin; takes the view that the inclusion of all the Mediterranean countries in the BP:UfM provides the opportunity to deal with the problems of the region in a more comprehensive manner and to link and coordinate the process with already existing programmes such as the UNEP Mediterranean Action Plan in a more effective way;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 41 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Urges that, in line with the Paris Declaration, the presence of the Arab League at meetings of the BP:UfM should not endlessly be called into question, and hence be allowed to make an active contribution to discussions and to the peace process;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 50 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
13. Hopes that the strengthening of Euro- Mediterranean relations will contribute to completion of the project forgive a boost to the development of an area of peace and prosperity; emphasises that this aim can only be achieved through negotiatedthe stepping-up of negotiations with a view to finding a lasting and comprehensive settlement of the conflicts in the region; highlights the urgent need for a shared security doctrine with the Arab countries, including those of the Persian Gulf, and with all the Mediterranean countries; takes the view that this new shared security doctrine should be based on a process of gradual demilitarisation and disarmament of the region with a view, in particular, to creating a zone free of nuclear weapons and of weapons of mass destruction;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 54 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
14. Reiterates the importance of promoting human rights and the rule of law; calls for an assessment of what has been achieved so far and for adjustment of the instruments implemented under the partnership, including as regards other international organisations such as the Council of EuropePoints out that one of the main goals of the Euro-Mediterranean policy is to promote the rule of law, democracy, respect for human rights and political pluralism, and considers, in this regard, that the Euro-Mediterranean partnership has not led to the expected results in the area of human rights;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 59 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Therefore calls on the Council and the Commission to clearly enshrine the promotion of human rights and democracy in the objectives of this new initiative, to further strengthen the implementation of existing mechanisms such as the human rights clause contained in the Association Agreements and to promote the creation of a mechanism for the implementation of that clause in the new generation of agreements, the ENP bilateral Action Plans and the setting-up of sub- committees on human rights;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 60 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Calls, moreover, for the setting-up of a Euro-Mediterranean Court of Human Rights giving all citizens of countries that have signed the Barcelona Declaration the right to lodge complaints in cases of human rights violations;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 78 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas there is a need for an extensive and results-oriented overhaul of the relations between the European Union and the Mediterranean partner countries, which should start by capitalising on the work already done but also address the limitations and the shortfalls of the policies implemented to date and in particular the disappointing track record of the Barcelona Process,
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 81 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the analysis of the achievements and shortcomings of the Barcelona Process should be duly taken into consideration so as to enable Euro-Mediterranean relations to be revisited in an efficient way and to give a new impetus to the Barcelona Process; whereas it is important in this regard to address the difficulties encountered in the development of cooperation and in the deepening of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership, such as the persistence of the conflict in the Middle East and serious political tensions in the region (as in the case of Western Sahara), the lack of progress in the field of democracy and human rights and the lack of public awareness of the process,
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 82 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the neighbourhood policy conducted with the Mediterranean countries has its limitations and, by placing the emphasis on bilateral relations, is proving to be lacking in balance and unable to contribute to a shared process of significant reform in the region,
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 86 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas since the launching of the Barcelona Process no substantial progress has been made in some of the partner countries as regards adherence to, and respect for, some of the common values and principles highlighted in the 1995 Barcelona Declaration to which they subscribed, especially as regards democracy, human rights and the rule of law,
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 89 #

2008/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas there is a need to promote regional and economic integration between the countries of the Mediterranean basin; whereas genuine regional and economic integration can only be achieved if concrete progress is made as regards the settlement of the existing conflicts,
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 2 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A
A. whereas respect for, and the promotion and safeguarding of, the universality of human rights is part of the European Union’s ethical and legal acquis and one of the cornerstones of European unity and integrity,
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 4 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C
C. whereas the United Nations and the UNHRC potentially constitute one of thconstitute the only worldwide organisations best able to deal comprehensively with the human rights issues and challenges facing mankind today,
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 6 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the decision on establishment of the UNHRC has been generally welcomed as an initiative to rectify the shortcomings of the UNCHRenhance the place of human rights within intergovernmental debates by setting up a quasi-standing body,
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 9 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I
I. whereas the fact that EU Member States constitute a numerical minority within the UNHRC compared to the fact that the African and Asian regional groups together represent 55% of the States within that body poses a serious challenge to the integration of EU positions in the work of the UNHRC, which poses a serious challenge to the integration of EU positions in the work of the UNHRC and therefore forces the EU to build cross-regional alliances with a view to promoting the human rights agenda,
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J
J. whereas the absence of the United States from the UNHRC has led to the need for the EU to strengthen its role as a leader of democratic countries on human rights issues, and at the same time to build further on its more natural role as a "soft power" and a "bridge-builder",deleted
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 16 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the UNHRC has the potential to develop into a valuable framework for the European Union's multilateral human rights efforts; regrets the fact that, during the first two years of its activities, the new body has not achieved substantial progress in improving the United Nations' human rights recddressed efficiently key situations concerning human rights violations around the world;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 22 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the fact that the procedure for elections to the UNHRC has made it possible to exclude from the UNHRC major human rights violators such as Iran and Belarus ; regrets, nevertheless, that not all geographic groups have organised genuine procedures for elections concerning accession to the UNHRC; regrets that the system of voluntary pledges has had very disparate and inadequate results, enabling governments to shy away from their international human rights obligations; in this regard, is deeply concerned by the instrumental use of so-called commitments by some members and therefore reaffirms that full cooperation with Special Procedures should remain the bottom-line criterion for acceding to the UNHRC;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 23 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets the growing division of the UNHRC into regional blocs; considers that this "bloc mentality" undermines its ability to deal effectively, impartially and objectively with human rights violations around the world; considers that this "bloc mentality" could be the real cause of the politicisation and selectivity of the UNHRC; looking ahead to the 2011 review, stresses that, if the situation does not improve, serious consideration should be given to opening up the UNHRC to universal membership, as in the case of the Third Committee of the General Assembly;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 27 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Recognises that a number of delegations in Geneva are insufficiently equipped to pursue human rights negotiations adequately and thus rely on group leaders to formulate their position; nevertheless, notes that this trend has been efficiently counterbalanced with regard to several key issues such as the code of conduct for Special Procedures and the situation in Darfur, notably within the Asian and African groups; emphasises at the same time that the positions adopted jointly by the EU together with the acceding countries have greatly contributed to the bloc mentality by forcing the other members to adopt the same attitude;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 28 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Acknowledges that the broad membership of the Council and the participation of many observer states ensures that virtually all countries are involved in the Council's debates; wonders, however, whether this broad participation is not undermining the body's effectiveness in terms of its ability to take decisions in response most serious situations and most important challenges as regards the protection of human rights in today's world;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 29 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Considers, looking ahead to the 2011 review, that the possibility of opening up the UNHRC to universal membership could be explored, while a smaller composition could prove to be beneficial; recalls, in this connection, that the task of the Third Committee of the United Nations General is to pass on within this body, which includes all UN member states, the main concerns of the Human Rights Council; considers that this body can also offset the Council's shortcomings, just as the General Assembly does with regard to the decisions of the Security Council, which is an important element of complementarity between the UNHCR and the Third Committee; calls on the EU to reiterate its commitment to supporting the UNHRC and improving its effectiveness, as a unique platform specialising in universal human rights and a specific forum dealing with human rights within the UN system;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 30 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
5. Expresses strong concern at the fact that the principle of the universality of human rights isinternationally recognised human rights norms and fundamental freedoms are being increasingly undermined, as illustrated in particular by the attempts on the part of certain countries to introduce limits to well-recognised human rights, such as freedom of expression, or to interpret human rights against a cultural or traditional background; calls on the EU to remain vigilant vis-à-vis these attempts and to strongly defend the principles of the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 33 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets that the relationship between the UNHRC and the Third Committee of the General Assembly remains ambiguous, illustrating the potential fragility of the UNHRC; expresses itself in favour of complementarity between the UNHRC and the Third Committee; calls on the EU to reiterate its commitment to supporting the UNHRC and improving its effectiveness, as a unique platform specialising in universal human rights and a specific forum dealing with human rights within the UN system;deleted
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 35 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes the introduction of conditions for the suspension of the country mandate of Burundi; recognises the importance of defining an exit strategy for each of these country procedures, but stresses that they should be based on the realisation of fully-fledged human rights action plans;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 39 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the fact that the UPR has provided an incentive to many States to commit themselves to reporting to treaty bodies, ratifyimplementing their international obligations, following up on the conclusions and recommendations of Treaty bodies and Special Procedures, presenting overview reports to Treaty bodies, responding to outstanding requests for the invitation of Special procedures and ratifying outstanding treaties and even adopting national legislation aimed at ensuring compliance with obligations stemming from treaties to which they have signed up;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 40 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
18. Deplores the lack of focus on economic, social and cultural rights as well as the rights of minorities during the UPR process and calls for increased attention to be given to these rights during the coming sessions, in line with the principle of the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 42 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Denounces the use of political alliances to shield certain States from scrutiny rather than to critically assess human rights conditions and protections, which seriously undermines the very purpose of the UPR; notes that this practice reached a dangerous level in the review of Tunisia, which appeared to be an orchestratedcontained declarations significantly contradicting independent expercise in filibusterts' findings;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 43 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
20. Takes note ofWelcomes the EU's decision not to coordinate efforts in respect of the UPR process by agreeing on a list of questions to be asked or undertaking any common analysis ofmake joint interventions in the country reviews but to ensure the complementarity of interventions so that the broad spectrum of issues may be raised; stresses in theis reports in anspect the EU's attempts to break down the “bloc mentality” at the UNHRC by raising questions on each other's record;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 45 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
21. Expresses concern that, in several cases, the final report of the UPR and the interactive dialogue during the review did not reflect the information contained in the summary documents or even in the concluding remarks contradicting independent experts' findings, thus depriving the review process of its significapertinence, and that the recommendations put forward in the reports of the Working Group are too vague and lack any operational substance; calls the members of the UPR Working Group to provide measurable, concrete, realistic and victim- oriented recommendations in its future reviews, based on information established by independent monitoring mechanisms or NGOs;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 46 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
22. Regrets the non-binding character of UPR recommendations, which stems from the right that the UPR affords States to decide which recommendations they can accept; notes that in some cases, such as thatpromote the implementation of international human rights obligations, as seen in the case of Sri Lanka, where the percentage of accepted recommendations was low; considers, however, that not all recommendations may be valuable or in line with international human rights obligations; therefore considers that this illustrates the fact that the UPR may prove not to be the most useful instrument in suchcertain cases, and highlights the importance of grounding the UPR process in the work of independent monitoring mechanisms and findings by NGOs while maintaining UNCHR country mandates;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 50 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
27. Welcomes the retention of the practice of the participation of human rights NGOs in the debates and hopes that this participation will be improved and strengthened in the future; reiterates its call for a reform of the UN Committee on NGOs, so as to ensure the effective participation of independent NGOs, and points out that recommendations for accreditation must be made by independent experts on the basis of the work and contributions of NGOs;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 56 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
32. Encourages the efforts of the OHCHR to strengthen its presence on the ground through the opening of regional offices; in this respect, welcomes the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the OHCHR and the Kyrgyz authorities on the opening of an OHCHR regional office in Bishkek; reiterates its appreciation of the crucial work done by the office in support of Treaty bodies and Special Procedures;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 57 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Expresses its appreciation of the work of Ms Louise Arbour as head of the OHCHR, together with the commitment and integrity that she has shown, and expresses its hopeis confident that her successor, Ms Navanethem Pillay, will engage with similar enthusiasm and live up to the challenges of the post;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 59 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35a. Recognises the commitments made by the EU to addressing country situations in theUNHRC; nevertheless regrets the lack of initiative and tangible results in responding adequately to the situation in the Palestinian Occupied Territories;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 61 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
37. Takes noteWelcomes the fact that the EU Member States participating in the UNHRC are split into two regional groupings, namely the Western European States group and the Eastern European States group; notes that the EU opposes the presentation of “clean slates” by regions, which results, effectively, in EU Member States competing between themselves for election to the UNHRC;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 65 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
40. Welcomes the increasing trend whereby EU Member States intervene in the debates in addition to the EU Presidency; calls on EU Member States to reinforce the EU’s message by putting across "one message, but with many voices"; encourages EU Member States to further develop cross-regional initiatives as a useful way of counteracting bloc policies;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 76 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49a. Calls on the EU to further commit itself to the universality and indivisibility of human rights in addressing core challenges such as migration and the fight against terrorism; considers that EU campaigns for the ratification of international human rights instruments will have no impact or credibility until EU Member States seriously commit themselves to ratifying and implementing all these instruments, in particular the UN Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families and the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture; stresses that failure to ratify them merely fuels criticism that double standards are being applied by the European Union;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 80 #

2008/2201(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
51. Reaffirms the need for a clear vision, political agenda and long-term strategy as regards the functioning of the UNHRC as well as the activities of EU Member States within that body, especially as regards the review of the HRC to be undertaken in 2011; considers that this strategy should include clear benchmarks; in this respect, calls on the EU to: – reaffirm and strongly defend the principles of the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights; – ensure that the ability of the UNHRC to address country situations, including through country mandates, is preserved and reinforced; – do its utmost to strengthen, notably through comprehensive and fully-fledged human rights action plans associated with these mechanisms; – ensure the independence and effectiveness of Special Procedures in general; –, and work towards further improvement of the efficiency of the UPR procesthe realisation of the obligation to cooperate with Special Procedures for members of the UNHRC; – work towards the grounding of the UPR process in the work of independent mechanisms and NGOs; – reaffirm the UNHRC's specific role as a universthe principal and legitimate international human rights forum and its complementarity vis-à-vis other UN bodies; – safeguard the independence of the OHCHR; – reinforce its external coalition-building strategy, notably through cross-regional initiatives; – further address its internal/external human rights credibility, notably throughTreaty ratification;
2008/10/17
Committee: AFET
Amendment 2 #

2008/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that fighting illegal immigration is a high priority for the European Union, and considers it crucial in this connection that Frontex should conclude operational cooperation agreements with the border control authorities of countries which have common borders with the European Union and with those of countries which, according to a wide range of risk analyses, are regarded as transit countries for illegal immigration; the right to leave one's country and the right to seek asylum are guaranteed by international law and that operations by Frontex to intercept migrants must fully respect them; recalls in this connection the obligations of States by virtue of the principle of non- refoulement and the ban on collective expulsions; recalls likewise the obligations of States by virtue of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; stresses that consideration of an asylum application, in compliance with the associated procedural guarantee, is not a process that can be carried out on the high seas; considers therefore that refoulement at sea would not be of a nature to guarantee respect for the rights of asylum-seekers and migrants;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 7 #

2008/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Considers it very important that Frontex should provide extensive assistance to the competent authorities of such States in order to ensure that both the training and technical expertise of border control personnel of such countries and their actual border control systems comply with EU standards, norms and requirements; advocates that the necessary financial and technical resources be made available for States which cooperate fully with Frontexstaff taking part in the operations of Frontex, particularly in the rapid border intervention teams, should undergo training in international humanitarian law and more specifically in the law of asylum and issues relating to the prevention of mistreatment; recalls, however, that responsibility for considering an asylum application rests solely with the national competent authorities and the HCR and under no circumstances with Frontex staff or border control officers;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 12 #

2008/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that Libya is a very important transit country for illegal immigrants on their way from North Africa to Italy and Malta, and that it is important to establish a systematic form of cooperation inot a State Party to the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees and has not transposed into its domestic law the provisions of the African Union cControlling borders withvention on the Stateus on the southern side of the Mediterranean Sea region, in which Libya plays a leading role and must be fully involved; calls, therefore, for the negotiationsf Refugees; recalls furthermore that migrants returned to Libya have no means of protection or redress against risks of mistreatment; considers, therefore, that in the absence of such guarantees, no negotiations should be conducted between Frontex and the Libyan authorities to be reinvigorated;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 17 #

2008/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it necessary that Frontex should, as soon as possible, reach an agreement with the authorities of Turkey and that the Turkish national police, the gendarmerie and the Coast Guard Command should all be involved in this future cooperation; advocates systematic and thorough evaluation of the implementation of a future agreement between Frontex and the Turkish authorities; notes in this connection that the last round of negotiations on a repatriation agreement between the European Union and Turkey dates back to December 2006 and that the European Commission even openly acknowledges that the negotiations have reached a complete impasse;deleted
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 23 #

2008/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that negotiations on an agreement between Frontex and the border control authorities of a third State, and more particularly a candidate Member State, are conducted against the background of the political and economic relations which exist between the European Union as a whole and the State in question and that active refusal by a State to cooperate with Fr are conducted against the background of international law and must therefore guarantee the principle of non-refoulement; considers in this context that there cannot be any agreement with third countries where a migrant who has been readmitted could be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, torture or could be subjected to any other punishment purely for having left the third country in question; considers in this contex must thave direct consequences for those relationst no readmission agreement should apply to people other than nationals or residents of the third country concerned;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 31 #

2008/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Calls upon the Commission and Council to investigate how Frontex and Eurosur can be integrated with efforts to combat terrorism, arms trafficking, drugs trafficking and international crime.onsiders the information provided to the European Parliament concerning the operations of Frontex to be inadequate; recommends in this context that it be made possible for the Director of the agency to be heard regularly by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and by the Committee on Foreign Affairs; proposes that an annual debate be held in plenary on the activity report of Frontex;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 34 #

2008/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers it very important that the further work of Frontex should be as transparent as possible and subject to regular parliamentary scrutiny;
2008/10/16
Committee: AFET
Amendment 5 #

2008/2063(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that both in the formulation and implementation of CFSP, the High Representative/Vice-President of the Commission is not only required to respect the principles enounced in Articles 2, 3 and 21 TEU but also fully respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
2008/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 46 #

2008/2063(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Resolves to put the respect of the principles in article 2, 3 and 21 TEU and the full application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in CFSP as one of its foremost imperatives; charges its responsible committee to monitor that they are effectively adhered to;
2008/05/30
Committee: AFET
Amendment 28 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Regrets that, to date, no evaluation or impact assessment has been carried out on EU sanctions policy and that it is therefore extremely difficult to gauge the policy's impact and effectiveness on the ground and thus to draw the necessary conclusions; calls on the Council and the Commission to carry out this evaluation work; 1considers, however, that the sanctions policy used against South Africa proved effective in helping to end apartheid; Or. fr OJ L 26, 31.1.2006, p. 28.
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 40 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. AcknowledgesWelcomes the fact that the overall EU sanctions instruments are generally deployed flexibly in accordance with needs on a case-by-case basis, which prevents them from being perceived as a 'European Penal Code' under which certain actions would automatically trigger a certain type of sanction; deplores, however, the fact that the EU has often applied its sanctions policy inconsistently, by treating third countries differently even though their human rights and democratic records are similar, and thus triggering criticism for applying 'double standards';
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 45 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that the European Union sanctions against the Palestinian Government formed in February 2006 following elections which the EU recognised as free and democratic have undermined the consistency of Union policy and proved seriously counterproductive by making the political and humanitarian situation considerably worse;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 49 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Believes that the effectiveness of a sanction depends on the European Union's capacity to maintain it for the full period and, in this connection, deplores the use of provisions such as 'sunset clauses' involving the automatic lifting of sanctions;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 55 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that most EU sanctions are being imposed on the basis of security concerns; underlines however that human rights violations should constitute a sufficient basis for the application of sanctions since they likewise represent a threat to security and stability;deleted
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 56 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses that the implementationappropriate measures implemented within the framework of the human rights clause cannot be regarded as an entirely autonomous or unilateral EU sanction, as it stems directly from the bilateral or multilateral agreement, which establishes a reciprocal undertaking to respect human rights; considers that appropriate measures taken in accordance with this clause exclusively concern the implementation of the relevant agreement in giving either party the lawful basis for suspending or annulling the agreement; considers, therefore, that the implementation of human rights clauses and autonomous or unilateral sanctions necessarily complement each other;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 57 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Considers that failure to take appropriate or restrictive measures in the event of a situation marked by persistent human rights violations seriously undermines the Union's human rights strategy, sanctions policy and credibility; in this connection, believes that the persistent violations of international law by Israel call for urgent action on the part of the Union;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 59 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
16. InsistWelcomes, therefore, on the systematic inclusion of human rights clauses and insists on the incorporation of a specific implementation mechanism in all new bilateral agreements signed with third countries; recalls, in this connection, the importance of the recommendations issued with a view to more effective and systematic implementation of the clause, namely the formulation of objectives and reference criteria, regular evaluation, involvement of the European Parliament and civil society at all stages of the clause's implementation;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 65 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Takes the view that coordinated action by the international community has a stronger impact than disparate and uneven actions by States or regional entities; welcomes, therefore, the notion expressed in the Basic Principles that UN Security Council sanctions should be preferred to EU sanctions and that the EU sanctions policy should continue to be based on the notion of a preference in favour of the UN regime; takes the view, however, that the priority given to the UN regime should not prevent the EU from adopting autonomous sanctions when action at UN level proves impossible or too lengthy; calls on the member States to do their utmost in this case to internationalise EU sanctions at UN level;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 72 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for a moreUnderlines the need for an in-depth analysis of each specific situation prior to the adoption of sanctions in order to assess the potential impact of different sanctions, and to determine which are the most effective in the light of all other relevant factors and comparable experiences; considers that asuch prior analysis is all the more justified since it is difficult to backtrack once the sanctions process has been initiated without undermining the EU's credibility and the expression of the EU's support for the population of the target third country, given the fact that the country's authorities can instrumentalise the EU decision; takes note in this respect of the current practice, under which the appropriateness, nature and effectiveness of the proposed sanctions are discussed in the Council on the basis of assessment by the Heads of Mission in the country concerned, and calls for the inclusion of an independent expert's report in such assessment;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 74 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Stresses, however, that such analysis should not be used to delay the adoption of sanctions; underlines in this respect that the two-step procedure for the imposition of sanctions under the CFSP provides scope for an urgent political reaction, initially through the adoption of a common position to be set out after a more in-depth analysis of the Regulation, detailing the exact nature and scope of the sanctions;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 79 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the ‘Sanctions’ formation of the Foreign Relations Counsellors Working Party (RELEX/Sanctions) to fulfil their mandate to the full; insists in particular on the need to conduct research prior to the adoption of sanctions and, after their adoption, to provide on a regular basis updated information on developments and to develop best practices with regard to the implementation and enforcement of restrictive measures;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 87 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
33. Calls for a limited application of the 'extraordinaryinterpretation of exemptions' to the freezing of assets for the purposes of meeting basic needs or for the payment of professional fees; calls for the creation of specific procedure for objections in the event that a Member State wishes to grant an exemption to the freezing of assets, since the efficiency of the restrictive measure is undermined by the lack of such a procedure given that the Member States are only required to inform the Commission in advance of such an exemption;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 94 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
42. Notes with concern that Member States' adherence to EU visa bans has not been opthat, while it is formally legal, the application of an exemption to travel restrictions by a Member State can undermine the ban from a politimcal standpoint; calls on the Member States, therefore, to adopt a concerted approach in applying travel restrictions and the relevant exemption clauses;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 98 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
44. Recalls the obligation of EU Member States to draft sanctions in compliance with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union, which requires the Union to respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States; stresses that the present blacklisting procedures at both the EU and the UN levels are deficient from the perspective of legal security and legal remedies; urges the Council to draw all the necessary conclusions and fully to apply the final judgments of the ECJCourt of First Instance as regards EU autonomous sanctions;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 113 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
51. Urges that sanctions be systematically accompanied, in the context of a multifold strategy, by enhanced positive measures to support civil society, human rights defenders and all kinds of projects promoting human rights and democracy; calls for the thematic programmes and instruments (EIDHR, non-state actors, investing in people), includingor humanitarian aid when justified by emergency situations, to contribute fully to achieving this objective;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 118 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 (to become paragraph 58)
598. Calls on the Commission to set up a groupnetwork of independent experts to put forward to the Council, as and when necessary, the most appropriate restrictive measures, to draw up regular reports on developments on the basis of the established criteria and objectives and, where necessary, to suggest ways in which implementation of sanctions might be improved; considers that the setting-up of such a groupnetwork would improve transparency and discussions on sanctions in general, and would also strengthen the implementation and ongoing monitoring of sanctions in particular cases;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 119 #

2008/2031(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 (to become paragraph 59)
589. Considers that the legitimacy of the sanctions policy, which constitutes a key and sensitive element of the CFSP, should be enhanced by involving the European Parliament at all stages of the procedure, in accordance with Article 21 of the TEU, in particular in the drafting and implementation of sanctions in the form of systematic consultation with, and regular reports from, the Commission and the Council and the network of independent experts; considers also that Parliament should be involved in overseeing the attainment of benchmarks by those who are subject to sanctions; instructs its Subcommittee on Human Rights to structure and supervise work in this area as regards any sanction whose objectives and reference criteria relate to human rights;
2008/06/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 7 #

2008/2026(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Having regard to the growing political importance of election observation and the fact that it is not possible to forecast the annual cost thereof, in particular because of the increase in security-related costs, calls for greater flexibility under the EIDHR so that annual funding requirements can be met;
2008/08/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 8 #

2008/2026(BUD)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Recognises that the risks associated with the implementation of the policy options chosen under the EIDHR, namely as regards giving support to civil society organisations and/or human rights defenders in countries and regions where fundamental freedoms are most at risk, are greater than those normally identified in relation to other policy options; points out that this is linked to the innovative and political requirements to which implementation gives rise, including the provision of support to organisations that do not have legal personality and grants made through umbrella organisations, in line with the provisions of the Financial Regulation;
2008/08/27
Committee: AFET
Amendment 2 #

2008/2020(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that in certain situations profiling constitutes a legitimate tool for law enforcement and border control; believeinsists, however, that, i on the absence ofbasis of Article 13of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights adequate legal restrictions and safeguards as regards the use of data on ethnicity, race, religion, nationality and political affiliation, there is a considerable risk that profiling may lead to must exclude discriminatory practices;
2008/12/11
Committee: AFET
Amendment 32 #

2008/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading after paragraph 8 (new)
International Dimension: Post-2012, external climate policy and international tradeHuman Impact
2008/10/10
Committee: CLIM
Amendment 33 #

2008/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (after subheading 'Human Impact')(new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to initiate a EU strategy for the accommodation of populations forced to move due to the impacts of climate change and of the protection of their rights;
2008/10/10
Committee: CLIM
Amendment 34 #

2008/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls for the creation of an international fund to assist in the management of climate-induced migrations and for further scientific assessment within the IPPC on displacement of populations due to climate change;
2008/10/10
Committee: CLIM
Amendment 407 #

2008/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Human impact Ha. whereas the impact of climate change on human societies is already being felt in many places, such as the Sahel, where desertification is having a major effect, Bangladesh, which is subject to repeated flooding, certain parts of Europe, and several Pacific islands which are destined to disappear underwater, bringing about the disappearance of nation states,
2008/10/13
Committee: CLIM
Amendment 408 #

2008/2015(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)
Hb. whereas the adaptation strategies that have been implemented are neither being sufficiently promoted nor are they sufficient in the long run, and whereas they will not be able to prevent major population displacements; whereas there are well-founded fears that populations fleeing unbearable environmental conditions may increase exponentially over the coming years;
2008/10/13
Committee: CLIM
Amendment 69 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
(6) The conditions and criteria on the basis of which an application for a single permit can be rejected ishould be objective, verifiable and laid down in national law including the obligation to respect the principle of Community preference as expressed in particular in the relevant provisions of the Acts of Accession of 16 April 2003 and 25 April 2005.
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 76 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
(18) This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognizsed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and has to be implemented accordingly. Specifically, this Directive should be applied with due respect for the freedom of assembly and association, the right to education, the freedom to choose an occupation and the right to engage in work, the principle of non-discrimination, the right to fair and just working conditions, the right to social security and social assistance and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, contained in Articles 12, 14, 15, 21, 31, 34 and 47 of the Charter.
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 78 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18 a (new)
(18a) This Directive should be applied without prejudice to more favourable provisions contained in EU legislation and international instruments. Specifically, this Directive respects the rights and principles contained in the European Social Charter of 18 October 1961 and the European Convention on the legal status of migrant workers of 24 November 1977.
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 87 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) who have been admitted to the territory of a Member State for a period not exceeding six months in any 12 month period to work on a seasonal basis;deleted
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 102 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
If the information supporting the application is inadequatecomplete according to publicly specified criteria, the designated authority shall notify the applicant of the additional information that is required. The period referred to in paragraph 2 shall be suspended until the authorities have received the additional information required.
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Any decision rejecting the application, not granting, modifying or renewing, suspending or withdrawing a single permit shall be open to challenge before the courts of the Member State concerned. The written notification shall specify the possible redress procedures availablecourt or administrative authority with which the person concerned may lodge an appeal and the time-limit for taking actionhe appeal.
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 114 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – point c
(c) have free access to the entire territory of the Member State issuing the single permit. Member States may impose territorial restrictions on the right of residence and the right to work within the limits provided for by national legislation for reasons of security, only where the same restrictions apply to their own nationals;
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 119 #

2007/0229(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11a Notification of decisions The notification and information referred to in Articles 5, 8 and 9 shall be provided in such a way that the applicant is able to comprehend their content and implications.
2010/03/24
Committee: LIBE