BETA

Activities of Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT related to 2013/0255(APP)

Plenary speeches (1)

European Public Prosecutor's Office (debate)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/0255(APP)

Amendments (11)

Amendment 16 #
A. whereas crime – in particular organised crime – is increasingly taking on a cross- border dimension and the onlya more effective response can comes from the EUincreased cooperation at the EU level, giving added value to the joint efforts of all the Member States;
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Da. Whereas 14 National Parliaments in 11 Member States have given reasoned opinions expressing their concerns on the basis of the principle of subsidiarity; whereas the Commission has decided to maintain the proposal as it stands;
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Considers the Commission proposal to be a further step towards the establishment of a European criminal justice area;deleted
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regrets that the Commission has decided to maintain its proposal unchanged, despite the triggering of the yellow card procedure by 14 National Parliaments; asks the Commission to reconsider its position and present a new proposal with the view to better respect the principle of subsidiarity;
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iii
(iii) the investigative tools available to the EPPO should be uniform, precisely identified and compatible with all the legal systems of the Member States;
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point iv
(iv) the admissibility of evidence and its assessment are key elements in the ascertainment of guilt. The relevant rules must therefore be clear and uniform throughout the area covered by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and should fully comply with personal defence safeguards;deleted
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – point v
(v) all decisions taken by the European Public Prosecutor should be subject to legal challenge before a superior court. In this regard, decisions taken centrally by the Public Prosecutor, as described in Articles 27, 28 and 29 concerning competence, dismissal of cases or transactions, should logically be subject to appeal before the Court of Justice;deleted
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Calls on the Council to take into account the following recommendations, to ensure that the structure of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is versatile, streamlined and efficient and is able to achieve maximum results;respects the principle of subsidiarity:
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – point i
(i) in order to ensure a successful outcome for investigations and their coordination, those who are required to conduct them shouldinvestigations should continue to be carried out by the competent authorities of the Member States because they have in-depth knowledge of the legal systems of their countries concerned. To that end, the organisational model of the EPPO should include, centrally, at least one representative per Member State;
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – point ii
(ii) likewise, to ensure that decisions are taken promptly and efficiently, the decision-making process should be able to be expanded by the EPPO, with the assistance of national Delegated Prosecutors responsible for specific cases;deleted
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – point iii
(iii) lastly,in order to ensure that the EPPO is able to guarantee high standards of independence, efficiency, experience and professionalism, its staff should be as highly qualified as possible and should ensure that the objectives set out in this resolution are achieved. In particular, the staff members in question may come from the judiciary or from other sectors in which they have acquired the aforementioned experience and professionalism. In this regard, the Commission’s statements in Paragraph 4 of the proposal’s Explanatory Memorandum, in relation to overall costs, should match actual requirements relating to the efficiency and functionality of the EPPO;
2014/02/19
Committee: LIBE