Activities of Andrew DUFF related to 2009/2241(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Institutional aspects of accession by the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms - Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in Kampala, Uganda (debate)
Amendments (16)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union, Article 218(6s 216(2), 218(6), 218(8) and 218(10) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Protocol on Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union concerning the accession of the Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 3
Paragraph 1 – indent 3
– accession will contribute to the harmonious development of the case law of the two European courts in the field of human rights, particularly because of the increased need for dialogue, and thus will create an integral system, in which the two courts will function in synchrony,
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 3 a (new)
Paragraph 1 – indent 3 a (new)
– accession will also compensate to some extent for the fact that the scope of the Court of Justice is somewhat constrained in the matters of foreign and security policy and police and security policy by providing useful external judicial supervision of all EU activities,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that, pursuant to Article 2 of Protocol No 8 to the Lisbon Treaty, the agreement on the accession of the Union to the ECHR must not affect the particular domestic situation of the Member States in relation to the ECHR and its protocols in general and with regard to any derogations and reservations made by Member States in particular, and that such circumstances have no effect on the distinctive legal position of the Union in relation to the ECHR;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Observes that the ECHR system has been supplemented by a series of additional protocols concerning the protection of rights which are not covered by the ECHR and suggests that the Union should accede to all the protocols which at least partially concern matters where the Union possesses powers (Nos 1, 4, 7 and 12), notwithstanding the fact that four of these additional protocols have not been signed up to by all EU Member States, the Union should accede to all the protocols which are consistent with the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 –
Paragraph 5 –
– the right to submit a list of three candidates for the post of judge, one of whom is elected by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on behalf of the Union and participates in the work of the Court on an equal footing of equality with the other judges, including when a party to the dispute is the Union,
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – indent 2
Paragraph 5 – indent 2
– the right to attend, and voteEuropean Commission will have the right to attend, and vote on behalf of the EU Member States at meetings of the Committee of Ministers when it performs its task of monitoring the execution of judgments relevant to EU competences given by the European Court of Human Rights or when it decides on the desirability of seeking an opinion from the Court and the right to be represented on the Steering Committee for Human Rights (a subsidiary body of the Committee of Ministers),
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Suggests that the panel established under Article 255 TFEU for the selection of members of the Court of Justice and General Court could also be used for the nomination of EU judges to the European Court of Human Rights;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is of the opinion that the Member States should not, with respect to each other and in their mutual relations with the Union, be entitled to bring interstate applications concerning an alleged breach of the provisions of Article 33 of the ECHR, as this would be contrary to the spirit of certain commitments arising from the Lisbon Treatyundertake not to submit a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of the EU Treaties to the European Court of Human Rights under the provisions of Article 33 of the ECHR;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers it appropriate that, in the interests of the proper administration of justice, in any case brought against a Member State before the European Court of Human Rights which may raise an issue concerning the law of the Union, the Union may, after being authorised by the Courtobserving certain procedures, be permitted to appear as a defendant in the case, and that in any case brought against the Union any Member State may, after being authorised by the Courtobserving certain procedures, be permitted to appear as a defendant in the case;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Is clearly aware of the fact that the European Court on Human Rights may find a violation in a case that has already been decided by the ECJ and stresses that this would in no way cast a doubt on ECJ's credibility as an ultimate umpire in the EU judicial system;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the ECHR has an important function in connection with the interpretation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as rights guaranteed by the Charter which correspond to rights recognised by the ECHRare practically the same rights that the ECHR contains must be interpreted in accordance with the Convention and as, by virtue of Article 6(3) of the Treaty on European Union, the ECHR constitutes a source of inspiration for the Court of Justice in the formulation of general principles of the Union's law; notes likewise that, pursuant to Article 53 of the ECHR, the Convention cannot be interpreted as limiting or adversely affecting the rights recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, so that the latter retains its full legal force;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is aware that accession as such will not resolve the extremely serious problems facing the ECHR system, namely on the one hand the excessive workload due to an exponential increase in the number of individual applications and on the other hand the reform of the structure and functioning of the Court to cope with it; whereas the European Court on Human Rights recognises the fact that it operates in a complex legal and political environment; notes that, in the absence of a solution to these problems, the system is in danger of collapse and that the entry into force of Protocol No 14, which has so far been delayed by the non-ratification of one signatory state, on 1 June 2010 will certainly help to reduce the number of uncompleted procedures but will not eliminate them;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Considers it essential to maintain the independence of the European Court of Human Rights in terms of personnel and budgetary policy;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Encourages the national parliaments of the EU Member States to clearly express their will and readiness to facilitate the accession process by involving their national courts and Ministries of Justice;