Activities of Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas this use of indicators, enforced by FATCA, may result in arbitrary exposure and punishment of individuals who might in reality have no substantive ties to the US; whereas FATCA in practice includes a large group of individuals, such as dual European/US citizens and their non-US family members, and in particular the so-called “accidental Americans” who by accident of birth inherited US citizenship, but who maintain no ties to the US, having never lived, worked or studied in the US and who do not hold US social security numbers;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital E

E. whereas the lives and livelihood of thousands of law-abiding EU citizens and their EU families are being very seriously affected by FATCA on a daily basis, as those falling within the definition of “US persons” have their saving accounts frozen, are denied access to all banking services including life insurance, pensions and mortgages due to the reluctance of financial institutions to follow the costly FATCA reporting; in addition their EU family members are seeing their personal data shared with the US and their access to EU banking services curtailed (e.g. joint accounts/mortgages);

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital E a (new)

E a. whereas Accidental Americans who do not want to be affected by FATCA are obliged to formally renounce their U.S.citizenship, which is a very cumbersome process for which a U.S. social security number or a U.S. international tax identification number are required, which inter alia most accidental Americans do not possess;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital E b (new)

E b. whereas American internet platforms such as AirBnB, Tripadvisor and Amazon, are required to collect taxpayer information from all EU citizens who make use of these online services, and hand this over to the American federal tax authority, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS); whereas the objective of this practice is to certify whether the user is a US citizen, and therefore to determine if the earnings through these platforms are subject to US tax reporting, in the context of FATCA; Whereas this practice is clearly not in line with EU data protection rules;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital H

H. whereas the Parliament, in its resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, took note of a significant lack of reciprocity between the US and the EU in the framework of the FATCA intergovernmental agreement;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital I

I. whereas ~~FATCA and~~multilateral and reciprocal Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) systems, such as the OECD Common Reporting Standard (CRS) on automatic exchange of tax information, are essential tools to fight corruption, cross- border tax fraud and tax evasion, while FATCA is unilateral and non-reciprocal;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital J

J. whereas the French Assemblée Nationale published a report in October 2016 following its bipartisan fact-finding mission to investigate the extraterritorial effects of certain US laws, including FATCA, recommending that the French Government either negotiate an amendment to its tax treaty with the US or request US legislators to amend US laws in order to allow French “accidental Americans” to exit the US system and their unwanted US citizenship on a no fees, no filings, no penalties basis; whereas a commission was recently set up to specifically look into the extraterritorial taxation of French “accidental Americans” by the US, and resolutions were tabled in November 2017 in both the Senate and the Assemblée Nationale on this particular issue; whereas on 15 May 2018, by a unanimous vote, the French Senate adopted a resolution, inviting the French government to immediately take measures to ensure that French accidental Americans’ right to a bank account is respected, that the discriminatory practices adopted by French banks in the wake of FATCA cease, and that an information campaign is immediately launched to inform French citizens living in the US about the implications of US nationality and tax laws; whereas the resolution further requests that a strong diplomatic effort is taken to find a solution for French accidental Americans that would allow them to exit their unwanted US citizenship on a no fees, no filings and no penalties basis and that the US honours its promise of reciprocity pursuant to which France agreed to sign its IGA;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital K

K. whereas the United States and Eritrea are the two only countries in the world that adopt citizen-based taxation (CBT), and Eritrea has been condemned by the United Nations for its efforts to enforce its “diaspora tax”;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Recital L

L. whereas the United States adopted in December 2017 a significant tax reform, which however did not abolish the citizen- based taxation principle for individuals, but did introduce territory based taxation for US multinational corporations;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Calls on Member States and the Commission to ensure that the fundamental rights of all Citizens, in particular the Accidental Americans, are ensured, especially the right to a private and family life, the right to privacy and the principle of non-discrimination, as laid down in the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union and in the European Convention of Human Rights;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission to expedite its analysis of national transposition measures of the Payment Accounts Directive and include the situation of “accidental Americans”, dual citizens and US citizens legally resident in the EU, in its assessment, paying due attention to any discrimination against taxpayers legally residing in the EU and qualifying as “US persons” for the purpose of FATCA by financial institutions;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Paragraph 4

4. Urges the Commission and the Working Party Article 29, to investigate without delay any infringement of EU data protection rules by Member States whose legislation authorizes the transfer of personal data to the US IRS for the purpose of FATCA, and start infringement procedures against Member States that fail to adequately enforce the EU data protection rules;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to do a full impact assessment of FATCA and the US extraterritorial practice of CBT on EU citizens, EU financial institutions and EU economies, taking into account ongoing efforts in France and other Member States, and explain if a serious discrepancy between EU citizens/residents in different EU Member States exists, especially as regards EU data protection rules and fundamental rights standards as a result of FATCA and “US indicia”; calls on the Commission to do a comprehensive assessment of the status of FATCA reciprocity, or lack thereof, across the EU, and compliance by the US with its obligations under the various IGAs signed with Member States;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to assess and, if necessary, take action to ensure that the EU fundamental rights and values enshrined in the Charter of fundamental rights and the European Convention of Human Rights, such as the right to privacy and the principle of non-discrimination, as well as the EU data protection rules, are respected in the context of FATCA and automatic exchange of tax information with the United States;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2646(RSP)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Paragraph 7

7. Regrets the inherent lack of reciprocity of IGAs signed by Member States, especially in terms of the scope of information to be exchanged, which is larger for Member States than it is for the United States; Calls on ~~the~~all Member States ~~who signed a Model 1 (A or B) FATCA agreement with the US to consider collectively suspend~~to collectively suspend the application of their IGAs (or the sharing of all information other than in respect of accounts held in the EU by US citizens resident ing the ~~application of their IGAs until full reciprocal exchange of financial account information is provided by the United States~~US) until such time as the US agrees to a multilateral approach to AEOI by either repealing FATCA and joining CRS or renegotiating FATCA on an EU wide basis and with identical reciprocal sharing obligations on both sides of the Atlantic;

2018/05/25
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

H a. whereas the Resolution on the adverse effects of the US Foreign Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) on EU citizens and in particular ‘accidental Americans’ (2018/2646(RSP)) adopted on 26 June 2018 called on the Commission and the Council to present a joint EU approach to FATCA in order to adequately protect the rights of European citizens (in particular ‘accidental Americans’) and improve equal reciprocity in the automatic exchange of information by the US;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Rainer WIELAND, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates the need for a continuous public debate about the Union’s fields of activity in order to inform citizens about different levels of decision-making; calls for more intensive and structured biannual dialogue between the Committee on Petitions and Members of Committees on Petitions in the National Parliaments on petitions of major concerns to European citizens stimulating a genuine debate between MEPs and national MPs centred on petitions that would further raise awareness of EU policies and clarity on competences of the EU and of Members States;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Rainer WIELAND, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Takes note of four public hearings on various topics, namely on ‘Citizens’ rights after Brexit’ together with the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs on 1 February 2018, on ‘European Citizens’ Initiative - Revision of Regulation’ together with the Committee on Constitutional Affairs on 21 February 2018, on ‘Impact of endocrine disruptors on public health’ on 22 March 2018 together with the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, and on ‘The rights of persons with disabilities’ on 9 October 2018; reminds the committee members of the importance of attending public hearings requested and organised by the committee; calls on the petitions network to put forward specific public hearings and topics for EP studies and EP resolutions, which reflect the connection between the ongoing legislative work and the political scrutiny power of the EP and the petitions of major concerns; underlines that the petitions network is the right forum to put forward common initiatives for petitions treatment, which could exhaustively express the European Parliament's contribution to European citizens’ petitions;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Rainer WIELAND, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Trusts that the petitions network is a means to make the Committee on Petitions more visible and relevant in the work of the other committees of Parliament, so that petitions are better taken into consideration in legislative work; reaffirms its belief that meetings of the petitions network are vital for strengthening cooperation between the parliamentary committees through exchange of information and sharing of best practices between the network members; calls on the Committee on Petitions to nominate accordingly EP Rapporteurs on EU policies clusters, which could effectively and efficiently work with their respective counterparts of the petitions network in order to streamline common initiatives for the treatment of petitions across the European Parliament;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines the aim of the Committee on Petitions to raise awareness on citizens’ concerns in plenary debates; draws attention to the oral question on disenfranchisement of voting rights in the EU, debated in plenary on 2 October 2018, the oral question on the participation of persons with disabilities in the European elections, adopted in committee on 21 March 2018, and the oral question tabled jointly with the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety on concerns about Natura 2000 protected areas based on petitions received, adopted in committee on 21 November 2018;; calls on the European Commission and the Council to respond to the EP resolutions, based on petitions in a follow up Plenary Debate not later than 6 months in order to provide answers timely and effectively to specific European citizens’ concerns;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Regrets the lack of response from the Member States to solve the problems reported by citizens affected by FATCA~~Notes that the FATCA framework of the United State is implemented within the Union through bilateral intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) negotiated between the United States and each Member State; Regrets the lack of response from the Member States to solve the problems reported by citizens affected by FATCA; emphasises the role of the Union to guarantee effective implementation of data protection rules in order to ensure high level of protection of EU citizens in terms of related fundamental rights; asks the Commission to work closely with the national data protection authorities in order to promote a fact-finding exercise to clarify the situation in the Member States concerning possible breaches of EU law on the protection of personal data; furthermore calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the European Data Protection Board, to launch a country based study in order to assess whether and to what extent IGAs concerning FATCA respect the right to privacy of EU citizens; calls on the Member States to prevent discrimination against consumers legally resident in the Union, regardless of whether they are considered or not as ‘US persons’ and, if they are of the importance of their economic and personal ties with the United States;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2280(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Highlights the fact-finding visit to Famagusta, Cyprus, on 7-8 May 2018, aiming to reassess and update the committee´s information of the situation in Famagusta, and in particular the sealed-off section of the city called Varosha, in the context of petition 733/2004 submitted by Loizos Afxentiou, on behalf of the Famagusta Refugee Movement, 10 years after the Committee’s previous fact-finding visit; reaffirms its support for the mission report recommendation to call on the European Commission, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the EU Council and all EU Member States to table a new resolution in the UN Security Council calling for political and economic sanctions against Turkey for its acts of aggression in the eastern Mediterranean Sea and for its non-compliance with Resolutions 550 (1984) and 789 (1992) of the UN Security Council;

2018/12/18
Committee: PETI

2018/2103(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas women and girls in the EU experience structural gender inequality in a variety of forms and in a range of settings – including gender discrimination, sexual harassment, gender- based violence and misogynistic hate speech – which severely limits their ability to enjoy their rights and to participate on an equal footing in society; whereas in 2017, the #MeToo movement raised awareness of the scale and intensity of the sexual harassment and sexual and gender- based violence women face;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the press and civil society organisations play a fundamental role in a democracy;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas Article 21 (1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states that any discrimination based on grounds such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, languages or membership of a national minority shall be prohibited; whereas migrants, descendants of migrants and members of minority ethnic groups continue to face widespread discrimination across the EU and in all areas of life; whereas, in spite of numerous calls on the Commission, only limited steps have been taken to ensure the effective protection of minorities; whereas persistent racist and xenophobic attitudes are embraced by opinion leaders and politicians across the EU, fostering a social climate that provides fertile ground for racism, discrimination and hate crimes; whereas these views run counter to the common European values which all the Member States have undertaken to uphold;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas respect for the rule of law is a prerequisite for the protection of fundamental rights, and whereas Member States ~~have the ultimat~~are responsib~~ility to~~le for safeguarding the human rights of all people by enacting and implementing international human rights treaties and conventions; whereas the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights should be continually consolidated; whereas any attempt to undermine these principles is to the detriment not only of the Member State concerned but also of the Union as a whole;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas all Member States have undertaken to respect and promote the founding values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union; whereas monitoring the situation in each Member State cannot constitute an infringement of their sovereignty;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ERecalls that women are often the victims of double discrimination due, inter alia, to their ethnic minority status, sexual orientation, disability or migrant status; expresses concern about the risk of misogyny in European societies and its impact on women’s fundamental rights in all spheres of life; calls on Member States to address the key obstacles to gender equality in economic empowerment and political participation, including sexual harassment which hampers women’s full participation in the labour market; highlights the fact that gender stereotypes must be tackled from an early age to effectively address the under- representation of women in work, decision making and politics; calls on Member States to appropriately address this issue in school curricula;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Expresses concerns about the obstacles to the work of human rights defenders, including civil society organisations active in the field of fundamental rights and democracy; recognises the key role of these organisations in making fundamental rights and values a reality for everyone and stresses that they should be able to carry out their work in a safe and well-supported environment; is concerned by the closing down of civil society space in some Member States; calls on the EU and the Member States to address proactively the root causes of shrinking civil society space and to uphold their fundamental rights;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 i (new)

11i. Recalls that the history of European integration is based on the fight against cultural isolationism, populism, hate speech, calls for violence and discrimination against minorities; notes that the raison d'être of the European project and the societal gains it has brought about are increasingly being undermined by political factions, including small neo-Nazi groups, which are totally at odds with shared European values;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3

Racism, xenophobia, discrimination and hate speech and crimes

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Condemns the rise of far-right movements in the strongest possible terms, and calls for all Member States to take effective, proportionate action to sanction hate crimes and hate speech; is concerned at the trivialisation of hate speech, which can be attributed to political figures;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)

12c. Calls on all the Member States to draw up action plans to combat racism, xenophobia, discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes; calls on the Member States in particular to ensure that children are made aware of these issues as a matter of course via the school curriculum, notably with a view to enabling them to identify the features of hate speech and incitement to violence, especially online;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Member States to make efforts to systematically record, collect and publish annually comparable data on ethnic discrimination, or discrimination against any other type of minority, and hate crime in order to enable them and other key stakeholders to develop effective, evidence-based legal and policy responses to these phenomena; recalls that any data should be collected in accordance with national legal frameworks and EU data protection legislation;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Emphasises the need to encourage victims to report hate crimes or discrimination, and to give them appropriate protection and support;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Member States to continue their efforts to ensure the effective practical enforcement of the Race Equality Directive (2000/43/EC)4 and to ensure effective enforcement of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia to tackle persisting discrimination against Roma, anti- Semitism, Islamophobia, Afrophobia and anti-Gypsyism; points out that the Member States should review their national integration strategies to ensure that all people regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, gender, disability or any other status are empowered to engage actively in the process of inclusion by promoting their social, economic, political and cultural participation in society; __________________ 4 OJ C 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22. OJ C 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22.

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Deplores the fact that in 2017, LGBTI people were still victims of discrimination and hatred and encourages the Member States to adopt laws and policies to combat homophobia and transphobia, in particular on the basis of the ‘List of actions to advance LGBTI equality’ published by the European Commission;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Welcomes the efforts of the EU’s high-level group on combating racism, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance, in particular as regards access to justice and protecting the victims of hate crime, as well as in the areas of the registration of hate crimes by law enforcement services and the provision of training for law enforcement services and judicial authorities; calls on the Member States and other stakeholders to take full account of the principles referred to in the high-level group’s conclusions;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4

Rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Recalls that the rule of law is part of and a prerequisite for the protection of all values listed in Article 2 of the TEU; calls on all relevant actors at European and national level, including governments, parliaments and the judiciary, to step up efforts to uphold and reinforce the rule of law; recalls that these actors have the responsibility to address rule of law concerns and that they play an important role in preventing any erosion of the rule of law, which is not a blind application of law but our democratic acceptance of being ruled by law;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Recalls that the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, has the legitimacy and authority to ensure that all Member States are upholding the principles of the rule of law and the other values referred to in Article 2 of the TEU; insists that Article 7 of the TEU should be employed if all other remedies have failed; recalls that, in his 2018 State of the Union address, President Juncker pointed out that ‘Article 7 must be applied whenever the rule of law is threatened’;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Emphasises that the Council and Parliament also have a key role to play in safeguarding the rule of law and the other values referred to in Article 2 of the TEU; welcomes the efforts made by certain Member States to see to it that, within the Council, a regular assessment is made of the situation with regard to the rule of law in each Member State; takes the view that such an assessment would make it possible to strengthen dialogue and mutual trust among Member States when it comes to the rule of law; calls on the Council to take swift action with a view to achieving this aim;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)

18b. Emphasises that, in certain Member States, there are serious and persistent breaches of the values referred to in Article 2 of the TEU, and takes the view that the EU’s ineffectiveness in putting an end to these situations is undermining both the trust among the Member States and the credibility of the EU, not only in the eyes of the public but also in the rest of the international community; emphasises, furthermore, that the persistent failure to address these breaches has encouraged other Member States to follow the same path;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)

18c. Emphasises that the unanimity rule makes it impossible to impose sanctions under Article 7 of the TEU, because several Member States are concerned; takes the view that the EU should be able to impose sanctions on Member States that no longer uphold the values enshrined in Article 2, without necessarily having to resort to using Article 7; stresses, however, that such sanctions should not replace the triggering of Article 7; takes note of the proposal for a regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States; takes the view that any decision taken pursuant to that regulation should be based, inter alia, on a regular and impartial assessment of the situation with regard to the rule of law in each Member State;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 d (new)

18d. Takes note of the proposal for a regulation establishing the ‘Rights and Values’ programme for the next multiannual financial framework; takes the view that the funding made available under that programme should be used to provide increased support for civil society organisations that promote European values such as respect for the rule of law, especially in Member States in which a generalised deficiency with regard to the rule of law has been identified;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Recalls the need for an impartial, regular assessment of the situation with regard to the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights in all the Member States; stresses that such an assessment must be based on objective criteria; recalls, in this regard, Parliament’s resolution with recommendations to the Commission on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights5, adopted on 10 October 2016; reiterates its call on the Commission to submit, on the basis of Article 295 of the TFEU, a proposal for the conclusion of a Union Pact for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (EU Pact for DRF) in the form of an interinstitutional agreement laying down arrangements facilitating the cooperation between the Union institutions and the Member States in the framework of Article 7 of the TEU; __________________ 5 OJ C 215, 19.6.2018, p. 162. OJ C 215, 19.6.2018, p. 162.

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. ~~Calls on Member States to~~Stresses that, when implementing intero~~duce specific safeguards to guarante~~perability, Member States should ensure that the interoperability of large- scale IT systems does not lead to adverse effects on the rights of children or vulnerable persons, such as applicants for and beneficiaries of international protection, or to discriminatory profiling; ~~calls on~~urges the Member States to ensure that the objectives for the implementation of interoperability ~~aims at fulfilling~~include a child protection objective, such as identifying missing children and assisting family reunification;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Stresses that Member States should ~~consider~~go ahead with putting into place a combination of protection-related schemes, such as resettlement and humanitarian admission, and regular mobility schemes to promote legal pathways to the EU for persons in need of ~~protection~~international protection; takes the view that the Union should play a key role in global resettlement efforts; calls on Member States to increase resettlement places with a view to providing the most vulnerable refugees with a legal channel; recalls that any action undertaken by a Member State, when acting within the scope of EU law, must respect the rights and principles of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; calls on EU Member States to effectively ensure the right to asylum and to accept relocation of refugees from Member States most affected by high numbers of arrivals; also calls on Member States to respect the principle of non-refoulement and introduce adequate procedural safeguards to their asylum and border procedures, including safeguards against collective expulsion;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2103(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. ~~Acknowledges that before envisaging any kind of integration process, it is important to~~Stresses that addressing the vulnerabilities and specific needs of all migrants should be an integral part of the integration process; recalls that the assessment of the needs of migrants should happen regularly and as long as it is needed, as their situation and needs might evolve; underlines the fact that reunification with family members is a powerful tool to empower migrants and give them the feeling that they can start settling and integrating in their new host society; calls for the sharing between Member States of good integration practices to be stepped up;

2018/10/05
Committee: LIBE

2018/2096(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Is deeply concerned that a common criticism of the European Union is that it is democratically deficient. Therefore, by having one of its three main institutions taking decisions without the transparency that is to be expected from a democratic establishment is detrimental to the ambitious venture that is the European project;

2018/11/06
Committee: AFCO PETI

2018/2096(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that a high degree of transparency acts as a safeguard against the emergence of speculation, fake news and conspiracy theories, in that it provides a factual basis for publicly refuting such claims;

2018/11/06
Committee: AFCO PETI

2018/2096(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Demands that the Council, as one of the two components of the European legislature, aligns its working methods with the standards of a parliamentary democracy, rather than acting like a diplomatic forum, which is not its intended function;

2018/11/06
Committee: AFCO PETI

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) This Regulation aims at ensuring the smooth functioning of the digital single market in an open and democratic society, by preventing the misuse of hosting services for terrorist purposes. The functioning of the digital single market should be improved by reinforcing legal certainty for hosting service providers, reinforcing users’ trust in the online environment, and by strengthening safeguards to fundamental rights, including the freedom of expression and information.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) The application of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC8 . In particular, any measures taken by the hosting service provider in compliance with this Regulation, including any voluntary proactive measures, should not in themselves lead to that service provider losing the benefit of the liability exemption provided for in that provision. This Regulation leaves unaffected the powers of national authorities and courts to establish liability of hosting service providers in specific cases where the conditions under Article 14 of Directive 2000/31/EC for liability exemption are not met. _________________ 8 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1).

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)

(7 a) This Regulation should not have the effect of modifying the obligation for Member States to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on the European Union and Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, nor the applicable rules on the processing of personal data, such as Regulation 2016/679 and Directive 2016/680.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The right to an effective remedy is enshrined in Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Each natural or legal person has the right to an effective judicial remedy before the competent national court against any of the measures taken pursuant to this Regulation, which can adversely affect the rights of that person. The right includes, in particular the possibility for hosting service providers and content providers to effectively contest the removal orders before the court of the Member State whose authorities issued the removal order. That right can be exercised before the court of the Member State where the hosting service provider has its main establishment or where the legal representative designated by the hosting provider pursuant to Article 16 resides or is established.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) In order to cover those online hosting services where terrorist content is disseminated, this Regulation should apply to information society services which store information provided by a recipient of the service at his or her request and in making the information stored available to th~~ird parties~~e general public, irrespective of whether this activity is of a mere technical, automatic and passive nature. By way of example such providers of information society services include social media platforms, video streaming services, video, image and audio sharing services, file sharing and other cloud services to the extent they make the information available to th~~ird parties and websites where users can make comments or post reviews~~e general public. The Regulation should also apply to hosting service providers established outside the Union but offering services within the Union, since a significant proportion of hosting service providers exposed to terrorist content on their services are established in third countries. This should ensure that all companies operating in the Digital Single Market comply with the same requirements, irrespective of their country of establishment. The determination as to whether a service provider offers services in the Union requires an assessment whether the service provider enables legal or natural persons in one or more Member States to use its services. However, the mere accessibility of a service provider’s website or of an email address and of other contact details in one or more Member States taken in isolation should not be a sufficient condition for the application of this Regulation.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) The procedure and obligations resulting from legal orders requesting hosting service providers to remove terrorist content or disable access to it, following an assessment by the competent authorities, should be harmonised. Member States should ~~remain free as to the choice of the competent authorities allowing them to designate administrative, law enforcement or judicial authorities with that task~~freely designate their competent authority. Given the speed at which terrorist content is disseminated across online services, this provision imposes obligations on hosting service providers to ensure that terrorist content identified in the removal order is removed or access to it is disabled within one hour from receiving the removal order. It is for the hosting service providers to decide whether to remove the content in question or disable access to the content for users in the Union.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) The competent authority should transmit the removal order directly to the addressee and point of contact by any electronic means capable of producing a written record under conditions that allow the service provider to establish authenticity, including the accuracy of the date and the time of sending and receipt of the order, ~~such as by secured email and platforms or other secured channels, including those made available by the service provider,~~ in line with the rules protecting personal data. ~~This requirement may notably be met by th~~Competent authorities should therefore use of qualified electronic registered delivery services as provided for by Regulation (EU) 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 . _________________ 12 Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/EC (OJ L 257, 28.8.2014, p. 73).

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Given the scale and speed necessary for effectively identifying and removing terrorist content, proportionate proactive measures, including by using automated means in certain cases, are an essential element in tackling terrorist content online. With a view to reducing the accessibility of terrorist content on their services, hosting service providers should assess on a voluntary basis whether it is appropriate to take proactive measures depending on the risks and level of exposure to terrorist content as well as to the effects on the rights of third parties and the public interest of information. Consequently, hosting service providers should determine, with the help of the Member States, what appropriate, effective and proportionate proactive measure should be put in place. This requirement should not imply a general monitoring obligation. In the context of this assessment, the absence of removal orders and referrals addressed to a hosting provider, is an indication of a low level of exposure to terrorist content and therefore should not be covered by Article 6.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) When putting in place voluntary proactive measures, hosting service providers should ensure that users’ right to freedom of expression and information - including to freely receive and impart information - is preserved. In addition to any requirement laid down in the law, including the legislation on protection of personal data, hosting service providers should act with due diligence and implement safeguards, including notably human oversight and verifications, where appropriate, to avoid any unintended and erroneous decision leading to removal of content that is not terrorist content. This is of particular relevance when hosting service providers use automated means to detect terrorist content. Any decision to use automated means, whether taken by the hosting service provider itself or pursuant to a request by the competent authority, should be assessed with regard to the reliability of the underlying technology and the ensuing impact on fundamental rights.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) In order to ensure that hosting service providers exposed to terrorist content due to the nature of the services they provide take appropriate measures to prevent the misuse of their services, the competent authorities should request these hosting service providers having received a removal order, which has become final, to report on the proactive measures taken. These could consist of measures to prevent the re-~~upload~~appearance of terrorist content, removed or access to it disabled as a result of a removal order or referrals they received, checking against publicly or privately-held tools containing known terrorist content. They may also employ the use of reliable technical tools to identify new terrorist content, either using those available on the market or those developed by the hosting service provider. The service provider should report on the specific proactive measures in place in order to allow the competent authority to judge whether the measures are effective and proportionate and whether, if automated means are used, the hosting service provider has the necessary abilities for human oversight and verification. In assessing the effectiveness and proportionality of the measures, competent authorities should take into account relevant parameters including the number of removal orders and referrals issued to the provider, their economic capacity and the impact of its service in disseminating terrorist content (for example, taking into account the number of users in the Union).

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) Following the request, the competent authority should enter into a constructive dialogue with the hosting service provider about the necessary proactive measures to be put in place. If necessary, the competent authority should impose the adoption of appropriate, effective and proportionate proactive measures where ~~it considers that the measures taken are insufficient to meet the risks~~there is a manifest lack of cooperation coming from the hosting service provider. A decision to impose such specific proactive measures should not~~, in principle,~~ lead to the imposition of a general obligation to monitor, as provided in Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC. Considering the particularly grave risks associated with the dissemination of terrorist content, the decisions adopted by the competent authorities on the basis of this Regulation could derogate from the approach established in Article 15(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC, as regards certain specific, targeted measures, the adoption of which is necessary for overriding public security reasons. Before adopting such decisions, the competent authority should strike a fair balance between the public interest objectives and the fundamental rights involved, in particular, the freedom of expression and information and the freedom to conduct a business, the economic capacity of the hosting service provider, and provide appropriate justification.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) To ensure proportionality, the period of preservation should be limited to six months to allow the content providers sufficient time to initiate the review process and to enable law enforcement access to relevant data for the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences. However, this period may be prolonged for the period that is necessary in case the review proceedings are initiated but not finalised within the six months period upon request by the authority carrying out the review. ~~This duration should be sufficient to allow law enforcement authorities to preserve the necessary evidence in relation to investigations, while ensuring the balance with the f~~After this time, the data affected should be erased, in compliance with Article 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental rRights ~~concerned~~.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) This Regulation does not affect the procedural guarantees and procedural investigation measures related to the access to content and related data preserved for the purposes of the investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences, as regulated under the national law of the Member States, and under Union legislation. Access to such content and data must be subject to a review by a court or independent administrative body, except in urgent cases.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) Effective legal protection according to Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union requires that persons are able to ascertain the reasons upon which the content uploaded by them has been removed or access to it disabled. For that purpose, the hosting service provider should make available to the content provider meaningful information enabling the content provider to contest the decision. ~~However, this does not necessarily require a notification to the content provider.~~ Depending on the circumstances, hosting service providers may replace content which is considered terrorist content, with a message that it has been removed or disabled in accordance with this Regulation. Further information about the reasons as well as possibilities for the content provider to contest the decision should be given upon request. Where competent authorities decide that for reasons of public security including in the context of an investigation, it is considered inappropriate or counter-productive to directly notify the content provider of the removal or disabling of content, they should inform the hosting service provider.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) In order to ensure the effective and sufficiently coherent implementation of proactive measures, competent authorities in Member States should liaise and cooperate with each other with regard to the discussions they have with hosting service providers as to the identification, implementation and assessment of specific proactive measures. Similarly, such cooperation is also needed in relation to the adoption of rules on penalties, as well as the implementation and the enforcement of penalties.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34

(34) In the absence of a general requirement for service providers to ensure a physical presence within the territory of the Union, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction the hosting service provider offering services within the Union falls. As a general rule, the hosting service provider falls under the jurisdiction of the Member State in which it has its main establishment or in which it has designated a legal representative. ~~Nevertheless, where another Member State issues a removal order, its authorities should be able to enforce their orders by taking coercive measures of a non-punitive nature, such as penalty payments.~~ With regards to a hosting service provider which has no establishment in the Union and does not designate a legal representative, any Member State should, nevertheless, be able to issue penalties, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37

(37) For the purposes of this Regulation, Member States should designate a competent authoritiey in line with their constitutional limits. The requirement to designate one competent authorit~~ies~~y does not necessarily require the establishment of new authorities but can be existing bodies tasked with the functions set out in this Regulation. This Regulation requires designating authorities competent for issuing removal orders, referrals and for overseeing proactive measures and for imposing penalties. ~~It is for Member States to decide how many authorities they wish to designate for these tasks.~~

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38

(38) Penalties are necessary to ensure the effective implementation by hosting service providers of the obligations pursuant to this Regulation. Member States should adopt rules on penalties, including, where appropriate, fining guidelines. Particularly severe penalties shall be ascertained in the event that the hosting service provider systematically fails to remove terrorist content or disable access to it within one hour from receipt of a removal order. Non-compliance in individual cases could be sanctioned while respecting the principles of ne bis in idem and of proportionality and ensuring that such sanctions take account of systematic failure. In order to ensure legal certainty, the regulation should set out to what extent the relevant obligations can be subject to penalties. Penalties for non-compliance with Article 6 should only be adopted in relation to obligations arising from a request to report pursuant to Article 6(2) or a decision imposing additional proactive measures pursuant to Article 6(4). When determining whether or not financial penalties should be imposed, due account should be taken of the financial resources of the provider. Member States shall ensure that penalties do not encourage the removal of content which is not terrorist content.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Content disseminated for educational, journalistic, artistic or research purposes, or awareness raising activities against terrorism, shall be considered content for legitimate purposes and is therefore excluded of this Regulation.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. This Regulation shall apply without prejudice to fundamental principles in EU and national law relating to freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom and pluralism of the media.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall be interpreted according to Articles 5 and 7 of the Directive (EU) 2017/541 on combating terrorism and shall apply:

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1

(1) 'hosting service provider' means a provider of information society services consisting in the storage of information provided by and ~~at the request of the content provider and in making the information stored available to third parties~~whose primary purpose is to make and provide content available to the general public;

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part

(5) 'illegal terrorist content' means one or more of the following information:

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point c

(c) promoting the criminal activities of a terrorist group, in particular by encouraging the participation in or support to a terrorist group within the meaning of Article 2(3) of Directive (EU) 2017/541;

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6

(6) ‘dissemination of illegal terrorist content’ means making illegal terrorist content available to third parties on the hosting service providers’ services;

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6

(6) ‘dissemination of terrorist content’ means making terrorist content available to th~~ird parties~~e general public on the hosting service providers’ services;

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. The competent authority shall have the power to issue a ~~decision~~removal order requiring the hosting service provider to remove terrorist content or disable access to it. This power shall be controlled by the competent judicial authority determined in accordance with national law.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The competent authority shall inform as a matter of priority of the issuing of the removal order the competent authorities of other Member States which may be concerned and/or interested by the content of the removal order.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b

(b) a detailed statement of reasons explaining why the content is considered terrorist content, at least, by reference to the categories of terrorist content listed in Article 2(5);

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4

4. ~~Upon request by the hosting service provider or by the content provider, the competent authority shall provide a detailed statement of reasons~~The competent authority shall provide a detailed statement of reasons, including the justification of the need for the immediate takedown, without prejudice to the obligation of the hosting service provider to comply with the removal order within the deadline set out in paragraph 2.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Upon request by the hosting service provider, the competent authority shall provide detailed information about the possible legal ways to contest the removal order in accordance with the national judicial proceedings. This request does not forfeit the obligation of the hosting service provider to comply with the removal order in the terms set out in this Article.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5

5. The competent authorit~~ies~~y shall address removal orders to the main establishment of the hosting service provider or to the legal representative designated by the hosting service provider pursuant to Article 16 and transmit it to the point of contact referred to in Article 14(1). Such orders shall be sent by electronic means capable of producing a written record under conditions allowing to establish the authentication of the sender, including the accuracy of the date and the time of sending and receipt of the order.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 9

9. The competent authority which issued the removal order shall inform the competent authority which oversees the implementation of proactive measures, referred to in Article 17(1)(c) when the removal order becomes final. A removal order becomes final where it has not been appealed or redressed within the deadline according to the applicable national law or where it has been confirmed following an appeal.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 7

7. Where the hosting service provider considers that the referral does not contain sufficient information to assess the referred content, it shall inform without delay the competent authorit~~ies~~y or relevant Union body, setting out what further information or clarification is required.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. Hosting service providers shall, where appropriate, take voluntary proactive measures to protect their services against the dissemination of terrorist content. The measures shall be effective, appropriate and proportionate, taking into account the risk and level of exposure to terrorist content, the technical and operational capacity, the fundamental rights of the users, and the fundamental importance of the freedom of expression and information in an open and democratic society.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

~~Where it has been informed according to Article 4(9), the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c)~~The competent authority shall request the hosting service provider to submit a report, within ~~three~~six months after receipt of the request and thereafter at least on an annual basis, oin the cases where the specific proactive measures ~~it has taken~~have taken place, including by using automated tools, with a view to:

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a

(a) preventing the re-upload of content which has previously been removed on the basis of a removal order or to which access has been disabled because it is considered to be terrorist content;

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Competent authorities shall collaborate with hosting service providers and put the means necessary to guarantee that the voluntary proactive measure in place are effective, proportional and do not constitute a burden for the hosting service providers.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3

3. Where the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) considers that the proactive measures taken and reported under paragraph 2 are insufficient in mitigating and managing the risk and level of exposure, it may request the hosting service provider to take specific additional proactive measures. For that purpose, the ~~hosting service provider~~competent authority shall co~~ope~~llaborate with the ~~competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c)~~hosting service provider with a view to identifying the specific measures that the hosting service provider ~~shall~~ put in place, taking due account of the nature, the technical, economical and operational capacity of the hosting service provider, establishing key objectives and benchmarks as well as timelines for their implementation.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4

4. Where no agreement can be reached within the three months from the request pursuant to paragraph 3, the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) may issue a decision imposing specific additional necessary and proportionate proactive measures. The decision shall take into account, in particular, the economic capacity of the hosting service provider and the effect of such measures on the fundamental rights of the users and the fundamental importance of the freedom of expression and information. Such a decision shall be sent to the main establishment of the hosting service provider or to the legal representative designated by the service provider. The hosting service provider shall regularly report on the implementation of such measures as specified by the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c).deleted

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. The competent authority shall not impose a general monitoring obligation as defined in Directive 2000/31/EC (e- commerce Directive).

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5

5. A hosting service provider may, at any time, request the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) a review and, where appropriate, to revoke a request or decision pursuant to paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 respectively. The competent authority shall provide a reasoned decision within a reasonable period of time after receiving the request by the hosting service provider.deleted

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Hosting service providers shall preserve terrorist content after judicial review or other independent administrative authority according to national legislation which has been removed or disabled as a result of a removal order, a referral or as a result of voluntary proactive measures pursuant to Articles 4, 5 and 6 and related data removed as a consequence of the removal of the terrorist content and which is necessary for:

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

(a) proceedings of administrative or judicial review and remedy,

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2

2. The terrorist content and related data referred to in paragraph 1 shall be preserved for six months and deleted after this period. The terrorist content shall, upon request from the competent authority or court, be preserved for a specifically defined longer period when and for as long as necessary for ongoing proceedings of administrative or judicial review referred to in paragraph 1(a).

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1

1. Hosting service providers shall set out in their terms and conditions their policy to prevent the dissemination of terrorist content, including, where appropriate, a meaningful explanation of the functioning of the voluntary proactive measures in place, including the use of automated tools.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. Hosting service providers which are or have been subject to referral or a removal order shall publish an annual transparency reports on action taken against the dissemination of terrorist content.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b

(b) information about the hosting service provider’s measures to prevent the re-~~upload~~appearance of content which has previously been removed or to which access has been disabled because it is considered to be terrorist content;

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. This Article does not forfeit the right to judicial remedy for the content provider established according to national law.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

2. Upon request of the content provider, the hosting service provider shall inform the content provider about the reasons for the removal or disabling of access and possibilities to contest the decision, and a copy of the removal order issued according to Article 4.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

Member States shall ensure that their competent authorit~~ies~~y haves the necessary capability and sufficient resources to achieve the aims and fulfil their obligations under this Regulation.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2

2. Competent authorities in Member States shall inform, coordinate and cooperate with the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) and (d) with regard to voluntary measures taken pursuant to Article 6 and enforcement actions pursuant to Article 18. Member States shall make sure that the competent authority referred to in Article 17(1)(c) and (d) is in possession of all the relevant information. For that purpose, Member States shall provide for the appropriate communication channels or mechanisms to ensure that the relevant information is shared in a timely manner.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3

3. Where an authority of another Member State has issued a removal order according to Article 4(1), that Member State has jurisdiction to take coercive measures according to its national law in order to enforce the removal order.deleted

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Each Member State shall designate ~~the authority or~~a single administrative or judicial authorit~~ies~~y competent to

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) oversee the implementation of voluntary proactive measures pursuant to Article 6;

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)

Article 17 a Right to an effective judicial remedy 1. Without prejudice to any other administrative or non-judicial remedy, each natural or legal person shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy against a legally binding decision of a competent authority. 2. Proceedings against a competent authority shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the hosting service provider has its main establishment or where, pursuant to Article 16, the legal representative designated resides or is established, without prejudice of the jurisdiction rules defined in Article 15. 3. Competent authorities must comply with the relevant European and national legislation when carrying out the duties described in Article 4, 5 and 6 of this Regulation. 4. If the judicial authority deems that the competent authority does not comply with the relevant legal framework, the competent authority shall ensure without undue delay the restitution of the content targeted by the removal order or referral.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d

~~(d) Article 6(2) and (4) (reports on proactive measures and the adoption of measures following a decision imposing specific proactive measures);~~deleted

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1

No sooner than [three years from the date of application of this Regulation], the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation and submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the application of this Regulation including the functioning of the effectiveness of the safeguard mechanisms and the impact on Fundamental Rights, including freedom of expression and freedom to receive and impart information. Where appropriate, the report shall be accompanied by legislative proposals. Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary for the preparation of the report.

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0331(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2

It shall apply from [612 months after its entry into force].

2019/02/25
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) An efficient return policy is an integral part of the comprehensive migration approach the Union and its Member States pursue. The Fund should support and encourage efforts by the Member States with a view to the effective implementation and further development of common standards on return, in particular as set out in Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council15 , and of an integrated and coordinated approach to return management. For sustainable return policies, the Fund should equally support related measures ~~in third countries~~, such as the reintegration of returnees. _________________ 15 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 (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98).

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) Readmission agreements and other arrangements are an integral component of the Union return policy and a central tool for the efficient management of migration flows, as they facilitate the swift return of irregular migrants. Those agreements and arrangements are an important element ~~in the framework of the dialogue and cooperation with third countries of origin and transit of irregular migrants and their implementation in third countries~~and should be supported in the interests of effective return policies at national and Union level.

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) Measures in ~~and in~~ relation to third countries supported through the Fund should complement other actions outside the Union supported through the Union’s external financing instruments. In particular, in implementing such actions, full coherence should be sought with the principles and general objectives of the Union’s external action and foreign policy in respect of the country or region in question and the Union international commitments. In relation to the external dimension, the Fund should target support to enhance cooperation with third countries and to reinforce key aspects of migration management in areas of interest to the Union's migration policy.

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) to strengthen and develop all aspects of the Common European Asylum System~~, including its external dimension~~;

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) to contribute to countering irregular migration and ensuring effectiveness of return and readmission ~~in third countries~~.

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2

2. To achieve the objectives of this Regulation, the Fund may support the actions in line with the Union priorities as referred to in Annex III in relation to ~~and in~~ third countries, where appropriate, in accordance with Article 5 and 6.

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 8

8. Whenever a Member State decides to implement projects with ~~or in~~ a third country with the support of the Fund, the Member State concerned shall consult the Commission prior to the start of the project.

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Cécile Kashetu KYENGE, Judith SARGENTINI, Ska KELLER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) the complementarity between the actions supported by the Fund and support provided by other Union funds, in particular those in ~~or in~~ relation to third countries;

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 1 – point c

(c) the development, monitoring and evaluation of policies and procedures including onthe development, collection, an~~d exchange of information and data,~~alysis, dissemination of qualitative and quantitative data and statistics on migration and international protection and the development and application of common statistical tools, methods and indicators for measuring progress and assessing policy developments;

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 2 – point h

(h) enhancing capacities of ~~third countri~~Member States to improve the protection of persons in need of protection;

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 4 – point j

(j) facilities and services ~~in third countries~~ ensuring appropriate temporary accommodation and reception upon arrival, including for unaccompanied minors and other vulnerable groups in line with international standards;

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 4 – point m

(m) support for ~~and actions in~~ third countries, including on infrastructure, equipment and other measures, provided these contribute to enhancing effective cooperation between third countries and the Union and its Member States on return and readmission.

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex V – part 1 – title

Specific objective 1: To strengthen and develop all aspects of the Common European Asylum System~~, including its external dimension~~:

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2018/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex VI – part 3 – point 4

~~004 Actions in third countries~~deleted

2018/12/12
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Requests that Commission submit, by 31 March 2019, on the basis of Articles 77(2)(b) ~~and 78(2)(g)~~ of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, a proposal for a Regulation on establishing a European Humanitarian Visa, following the recommendations set out in the Annex to this resolution;

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 2

– have Articles 77(2)(b) ~~and 78(2)(g)~~ of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as legal basis,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 4

– recall that the so-called Asylum Procedures Directive2 and Dublin Regulation3 only apply on the territory of the Member States, ~~while there is, at present, no regular means for asylum applicants to reach the territory where these instruments apply,~~ _________________ 2 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). 3 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31).

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 4 a (new)

– is of the view that a regulation for humanitarian visas should be complementary, in particular to the resettlement regulation, and provide a clear added value which cannot be provided by the instruments of the Common European Asylum System,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 5

– have as an objective to lay down provisions on the procedures and ~~condition~~guidelines for issuing a humanitarian visa to certain persons seeking international protection, to allow those persons to enter the territory of the Member State issuing the visa for the sole purpose of making an application for international protection in that Member State,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 6

– cover in its scope third-country nationals who must be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the Member States, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 539/20014 , and wh~~o are in need of protection against a real risk of being exposed to persecution or serious harm,~~ere the claims of exposure to or risk of persecution as defined in Directive 2011/95/(EU)5 , in line with the prohibition of refoulement, as recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, but who are not covered by [the new Regulation establishing a Union Resettlement Framework or] Directive 2001/55/EC6 ,are manifestly well founded. Member states shall further have the option to limit the scope for the issuing of a humanitarian visa to cases where a manifestly well-founded and immediate risk of persecution or further persecution would likely occur unless the person applying for the visa can avail themselves of the visa in order to leave their current geographical location. _________________ 4 Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement (OJ L 81, 21.3.2001, p. 1). 5 Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9). 6 Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof (OJ L 212, 7.8.2001, p. 12).

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 6 a (new)

– the regulation shall not impose an obligation on Member States to issue a humanitarian visa under certain given criteria but shall create a common framework for those Member States that wish to, on a case-by-case basis, issue humanitarian visas in order to facilitate the access to their territory for third country nationals that would otherwise not have been able to regularly enter into their territory in order to seek international protection.

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 6 b (new)

– a Member State that issues such a humanitarian visa shall have access to the same compensation from the AMIF funds as when a Member State receives a refugee through the European Resettlement Framework.

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 8

– provide for ~~admissibility criteria for such visa applications, including~~the practical modalities for an application such as the filling out of an application form, the provision of information on the applicant’s identity, including biometric identifiers (ten fingerprints and facial image taken life), and the provision of reasons, as far as possible documented, of the fear of persecution ~~or serious harm~~,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

– provide that applications for such a visa~~, once declared admissible,~~ be assessed on a prima facie basis to ~~consider~~establish whether applicants have a~~n arguable~~ manifestly well founded claim of exposure to a real risk of persecution ~~or serious harm~~ without conducting a full status determination process,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 12

– provide that ~~each applicant for such a visa be subject to a security screening, including by searching SIS, ECRIS-TCN,~~, before the issuing of such a visa, each applicant be subject to a security screening, through the relevant national and Europolean data,bases, in order to ensure that he or she does not pose ~~such a~~a security risk,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 16

– provide for such visas to be issued by means of a common sticker, and registered in a common European database,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 18

– provide that applications for such a visa be assessed by properly trained staff of the Member States and staff from competent Member State authorities with knowledge about the country of origin and having adequate expertise in Union asylum and fundamental rights law, having received appropriate training by the European Asylum Support Office,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 24

– be implemented in several stages, beginning with a transition period of two years before its provisions become applicable, to allow for the necessary preparations to be made, followed by a further period of three years, during which its application is limited geographically to applicants residing in certain third countries to be decided upon by means of delegated acts, taking account of EUROSTAT and UNHCR data on recognition rates and global protection needs per year,deleted

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 25

– be evaluated after two years from the start of its application ~~in view of deciding on a further progressive roll-out to cover ultimately all relevant refugee- producing third countries~~,

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2270(INL)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 1 – indent 27 – subi. 5

– the instruments constituting the Common European Asylum System, in particular the Dublin Regulation and the Asylum Procedures Directive, to ensure that any results of the examination of an application for a humanitarian visa are taken into account in the procedures conducted once the person seeking protection has reached the territory of the Member States.deleted

2018/09/03
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Not~~Welcomes the effectiveness of the measures taken at the external borders and the creation of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency; notes the efforts of the Agency in implementing the new regulation, especially through joint operations in the field of border surveillance and return, and by supporting the Member States particularly affected by migratory pressure; sees the importance of the newly introduced vulnerability assessment mechanism in uncovering weaknesses at the common external borders and preventing crises; emphasises the concerted efforts and cooperation between agencies and other stakeholders in organising the ‘Hotspot’ approach;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Not~~Welcomes the steps taken through the amendment of the Schengen Borders Code and introduction of mandatory systematic register checks at entry and exit points for third-country nationals and for EU nationals, while remaining vigilant about the effects these requirements have on the border crossings of EU nationals;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Considers cooperation with third countries, in particular in the context of development policy, trade, access to regular labour migration and readmission agreements, as onsome of the most essential elements in finding the solution to irregular migration;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the ongoing reform of the SIS and the establishment of other large-scale information systems, such as SEA, ECRIS-TCN and ETIAS, as well as the objective of improving their interoperability while preserving the necessary safeguards, namely with regard to data protection and privacy;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Considers that the work on proposals for interoperablity of information systems should be taken as an opportunity to improve and partially harmonise national IT systems and national infrastructure at border crossing points;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Not~~Welcomes the work done in the field of cross-border police and judicial cooperation and cooperation between law enforcement ~~cooperation~~agencies, and the work of Eurojust and EUROPOL, in particular the European Counter Terrorism Centre (ECTC) and the European Migrant Smuggling Centre, to counter organised crime, trafficking in human beings and terrorism through intelligence, information exchange and joint investigations;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to elaborate the European Integrated Border Management (IBM) concept and strategy on the basis of the provisions in the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that the current state of Schengen and the issues it has encountered are not due to problems in the structure and construction of Schengen itself but rather to the connected fields of the acquis, such as shortcomings in the area of the Common European Asylum System, including the Dublin Regulation, and ~~control~~management of the external borders;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Expresses great concern regarding the implementation of the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation ((EU) 2016/1624) and underlines the need for Member States to comply with the requirements stipulated in the regulation, in particular regarding the commitments to contribute sufficient human resources and technical equipment both to joint operations and the rapid reaction equipment pool;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Condemns the continued reintroduction of internal border checks as this undermines the basic principles of the Schengen area, and expresses doubts about the lawfulness, proportionality and necessity of some prolongations of controls; is also of the opinion that Member States have not taken the proper measures to ensure cooperation with other affected Member States to minimise the effects of these measures, nor have they provided enough information on the results of such controls, therefore hindering the analysis by the Commission and scrutiny by Parliament; considers the economic, political and social impacts of this practice to be detrimental to the unity of the Schengen area and harmful to the prosperity of European citizens; recalls that Member States have other tools available, namely targeted police controls, as recommended by the Commission;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point 1 (new)

(1) Underlines that a further prolongation of the existing -or the reintroduction of new- internal border controls would impose major economic costs to the EU as a whole by severely damaging the Single Market.

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Expresses concern about the lack of implementation in some areas of the regulation governing certain fields of external border control, such as the systematic consultation of databases during border checks and the thorough checking of the required entry conditions; is also concerned about the occasional unavailability of certain databases such as the SIS and the VIS at certain border crossing points; notes that clear non- compliance in establishing National Coordination Centres in accordance with the European Border Surveillance System Regulation (EUROSUR) is prevalent in many Member States;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – point 1 (new)

(1) Stresses that in order to ensure a common effective management of the EU’s external borders and strengthen the Schengen area as a whole, EU Member States that fulfil all necessary conditions for full accession, namely Bulgaria and Romania, should become full Schengen members without further delay.

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Stresses the need to improve the security of identity cards provided by the Member States to EU citizens; calls on the Commission to propose standards for the security and biometric features incorporated in identity cards, as is already the case with passports;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Calls on the Member States to boost the cooperation and the exchange of information between their intelligence services; in the short term, would like to see the creation of a European intelligence service.

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Member States to ensure swift return procedures, under humane and dignified conditions, once a return decision has been issued; calls on the Member States to use the opportunity offered by Directive 2001/40/EC to acknowledge and implement a return decision taken by another Member State rather than making a new return decision or sending an irregular migrant back to the first issuing Member State; calls on the Member States to take specific steps to ensure adequate infrastructure, accommodation and living conditions for arriving asylum seekers, especially taking into consideration the needs of unaccompanied minors and families with minors; calls on the Member States to bring their detention facilities into line with the requirements so as to meet capacity demand, and to increase the use of alternative measures to detention;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Heinz K. BECKER, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Michał BONI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Member States to ensure swift return procedures, with full respect of fundamental rights, once a return decision has been issued; calls on the Member States to take specific steps to ensure adequate infrastructure, accommodation and living conditions for arriving asylum seekers, especially taking into consideration the needs of unaccompanied minors and families with minors; calls on the Member States to bring their detention facilities into line with the requirements so as to meet capacity demand, and to increase the use of alternative measures to detention; calls on the Members States to honour their resettlement commitments, as agreed by the European Council in September 2015 and reconfirmed by the European Court of Justice in September2017, in order to restore order to the management of migration and foster solidarity and cooperation within the EU.

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31a. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative proposal to include, in a common European repository, documents for long-stay visas, residence permits and permits allowing passage to a border in order to facilitate controls at external borders and improve the authentication of documents;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2256(INI)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Stresses the importance of reforming and adapting the SIS to face new challenges swiftly, namely regarding the protection of ~~missing~~ children who are at risk or missing, the immediate, obligatory exchange of information on terrorism and the mandatory exchange of information on return decisions; highlights the anticipated substantial increase in the activity of the Supplementary Information Request at the National Entry (SIRENE) Bureau and calls on Member States to reinforce the means at its disposal by ensuring that it has adequate financial and human resources to carry out its new functions;

2018/03/14
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

- having regard to its resolution of 29 May 2017 on combating anti-Semitism (2017 / 2692 (RSP)),

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and whereas those values, which are common to the Member States and are values to which all Member States have freely subscribed, constitute the foundation of the rights enjoyed by those living in the Union;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas any clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU does not concern solely the individual Member State where the risk materialises but has an impact on the other Member States, mutual trust between them and on the very nature of the Union and its citizens’ rights;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas Article 7 , paragraph 1, TEU constitutes a preventive phase endowing the Union with the capacity to intervene in the event of a clear risk of a serious breach of common values; whereas such preventive action provides for a dialogue with the Member State concerned and is intended to avoid possible sanctions;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Heinz K. BECKER, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)

(11a) the need to consistently combat anti-Semitism and prosecute anti-Semitic statements and hateful statements against Jews

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 1 a (new)

(1a) According to Article 49 TEU, accession to the Union requires respect for and the promotion of the values referred to in Article 2. The accession of Hungary was a voluntary act based on national sovereignty, with a broad consensus across the Hungarian political spectrum.

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 4

(4) In its resolution of 17 May 2017 on the situation in Hungary, the European Parliament stated that the current situation in Hungary represents a clear risk of a serious breach of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU. and justified the triggering of the procedure provided for in Article 7, paragraph 1, TEU;

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 5

(5) A wide range of actors at the national, European and international level, have repeatedly expressed their deep concerns about the situation of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in Hungary, includingIn its 2003 Communication on Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union1 a, the Commission cites the reports of international organisations and NGOs as sources of information enabling respect for common values to be monitored. In this regard, the Commission cites the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, the OSCE and the NGOs Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Federation for Human Rights. These bodies and NGOs and also the EU institutions and bodies ~~of the Union, the Council of Europe, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations (UN), as well as numerous civil society organisations.~~are among the players at the national, European and international level which have repeatedly expressed their deep concerns about the situation of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in Hungary. __________________ 1a COM(2003) 606

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 10

(10) In recent years the Hungarian Government has extensively used national consultations, including one on migration and terrorism launched in May 2015. On 27 April 2017, the Commission pointed out that the national consultation “Let’s stop Brussels” contained several claims and allegations which were factually incorrect or highly misleading. Nevertheless, the Hungarian Government subsequently continued to have recourse to similar consultations.

2018/05/17
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 20 a (new)

(20a) According to the anti-corruption report published by the Commission in 20141 b, corruption is perceived as widespread (89%) in Hungary. According to the 2017 Corruption Perceptions Index published by Transparency International, Hungary has lost 10 points in six years, making it one of the lowest ranked states in the European Union. Hungary is one of the greatest recipients of EU funds and more than half of public investment comes from EU funds. Hungary, however, has refused to participate in the European Public Prosecutor's Office set up to combat infringements affecting the Union budget. __________________ 1b COM(2014) 38

2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Heinz K. BECKER, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Michał BONI

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 43

(43) In his report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated that he was concerned about the deterioration of the situation as regards racism and intolerance in Hungary, with anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form of intolerance, as illustrated by distinctively harsh, including violence targeting Roma people and paramilitary marches and patrolling in Roma-populated villages. He also pointed out that, despite positions taken by the Hungarian authorities to condemn anti-Semitic speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring problem, manifesting itself through hate speech and instances of violence against Jewish persons or property. In addition, in a speech held on 15. March 2018 in Budapest, the Prime Minister of Hungary, Victor Orban, used polemic attacks including clearly anti-Semitic stereotypes against George Soros, that according to the European Parliament`s Anti-Semitism Resolution, which appeals the importance of the IHRA working definition on Anti- Semitism, that serves as a model for all EU citizens, would have been assessed as punishable. In addition, he mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia targeting migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees, and of intolerance affecting other social groups such as LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless persons. The European Commission against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned similar concerns in its report on Hungary published on 9 June 2015.

2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE

2017/2131(INL)

Heinz K. BECKER, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Michał BONI

Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 49 a (new)

(49a) Hungary, like other EU Member States, should legally enshrine IHRA`s working definition of Anti-Semitism as the basis for criminal, media and educational measures.

2018/06/25
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas persistent and structural anti-Gypsyism2 can be detected at all levels of European society; on a daily basis manifesting itself, e.g. in individual and institutional neglect, discrimination, belittling, othering and scapegoating; 2: Anti-Gypsyism is sometimes spelt differently, and in the various Member States it is sometimes referred to by a slightly different term, such as Antiziganismus

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Bodil VALERO

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas anti-Gypsyism can be found in the work and workings of public authorities and institutions in all spheres and at all levels in the Member States, manifesting itself most commonly in the failure to provide Roma with equal access, or any access to public utilities and services, their denial of equal rights and equal treatment, ~~and the creation of discriminative programmes~~the omission of Roma people from policy-making and knowledge-production processes, the creation of discriminative programmes and the misuse of funding opportunities for improving the lives of Roma;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas inadvertent anti-Gypsyism can even be observed in the workings of ~~the~~ EU institutions, as numerous EU programmes and funds that could have a positive impact on the living conditions and life prospects of Roma do not reach them, as well as in the EU acquis, which often fails to take into consideration the challenges faced by Roma, who, due to their having been subject to multiple forms of discrimination for centuries, are unable to enjoy the same rights and opportunities, and the same level of protection as other EU citizens or they symbolically designate the Roma as one of their beneficiaries but do not take into account their realities, and the discrimination they face in all walks of life;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

E a. whereas anti-Gypsyism, however unconscious it might be, can be revealed in the EU acquis, which often fails to take into consideration the realities and challenges of Roma, who, due to their having been subject to multiple discrimination for centuries, are unable to enjoy the same rights and opportunities, and the same level of protection provided by the EU acquis as other EU citizens;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas there is a persistent paternalistic treatment of Roma ~~in our society~~detectable both in language and actions in our society, only stressing the need for Roma "inclusion" or "integration", when, in fact, what is needed is a fundamental shift in approach; we need to focus on the failure of states to stop the deprivation of Roma and ensure their access to and full enjoyment of their fundamental rights and citizenship;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas Roma are continually referred to as a vulnerable people, when, in fact, depriving Roma of their inalienable human rights and denying them equal treatment and access ~~suggest that it is the structures established and maintained by those in power that render Roma vulnerable~~to welfare, services, information, justice, education, healthcare, employment, etc. suggest that it is the structures established and maintained by those in power that are discriminatory, that render Roma vulnerable, that this demonstrates that the relevant authorities have ignored their human rights responsibilities;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that in order to fight against the subconscious societal consensus to exclude Roma and in order to tear down stereotypes~~, it is essential to educate mainstream societies by awareness-raising campaigns on anti-Gypsyism~~ created and reinforced through popular literature, media, arts and language through centuries, it is essential to educate mainstream societies about the diversity of Roma, their history, and the extent and severity of the anti-Gypsyism that they face in their everyday lives; in that respect, calls on Member States to take full responsibility for their Roma citizens and launch long-term awareness-raising and intersectional sensitising campaigns;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Considers active, meaningful participation by Roma as key in tackling anti-Gypsyism effectively and creating much-needed mutual trust for the benefit of the whole society; calls on the Commission and Member States to design strategies featuring both proactive and reactive measures on the basis of real, systemic consultations with Roma representatives and NGOs, and involve them in the running, monitoring and evaluation of mainstream programmes and projects launched;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. UFor the sake of creating essential, mutual trust, urges the Commission to set up a truth and reconciliation commission at EU level to acknowledge the persecution, exclusion and disownment of Roma throughout the centuries, and to document these in an official white paper and to engage with Parliament in carrying out research on how to launch such a process at EU level, with the involvement of Roma experts;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on Member States to set up national truth and reconciliation commissions ~~and to make the history of Roma part of school curricula~~with the involvement of members of Parliament, government officials, lawyers and Roma representatives to acknowledge the human rights violations of Roma, and to make the history of Roma part of the curricula in schools; commemorate the victims of the Roma Holocaust and mark 2 August as Roma Holocaust Memorial Day; grant appropriate, immediate restitution to living Holocaust survivors through a simplified procedure, accompanied by an awareness-raising campaign;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to include Roma victims in their commemorations held on 27 January each year to mark Holocaust Remembrance Day and to organise trainings for civil servants on the Roma Holocaust;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Expresses its concern that most mainstream programmes, including those covered by Structural Funds, fail to reach out to the most disadvantaged, in particular the Roma; therefore, calls on the Court of Auditors to check the performance of EU ~~programmes~~employment- and education programmes, such as Erasmus+ and the YEI, in this regard;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to - assess EU programmes and funding opportunities to determine if they meet the requirement of non-discrimination and participation, and where necessary, to take corrective measures~~, including by suspending~~ without delay; - safeguard that the complaint mechanism is made more accessible and transparent for residents, NGOs and authorities to enable them to report discriminatory EU funds and programmes; - suspend funding in cases of misuse of EU funds, a~~nd, and to~~s the repeated societal narrative of the amount of money spent on Roma without achieving tangible results feeds anti-Gypsyism; - reform ESIF so that they provide financial support to the fight against anti- Gypsyism in a more proactive way, and - extend the Europe for Citizens and the Rights, Equality and Citizenship funding programmes recognising the ~~role of~~important role of civil society watchdog organisations in monitoring anti-Gypsyism and ensuring the respect of fundamental rights;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to - ensure that the projects financed by the EU are inclusive and fight segregation; segregational practices must be clearly described and explicitly excluded from funding; - improve funding opportunities in order to safeguard that the education and employment opportunities created provide a real and sustainable way out of long- term unemployment, which is necessary to live in dignity;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. CBased on the alarming reports of NGOs and watchdog organisations, calls on the Commission to continue launching infringement proceedings against all Member States, without exception, that breach or fail to transpose or implement equal treatment directives, such as the Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC), the Free Movement and Residence Directive (2004/38/EC), the Victims' Rights Directive (2012/29/EU), the Council Framework Decision (2008/913/JHA) on racism and xenophobia, the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (2010/13/EU), and the Council Directive on equal treatment between men and women (2004/113/EC) and that on equal treatment in employment and occupation (2000/78/EC);

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on Member States to ~~take measures to prevent and counter anti-Roma hate speech~~- clearly condemn and sanction the denial of Roma Holocaust, hate speech and scapegoating by politicians and public officials at all levels and in all types of media, as they directly reinforce anti- Gypsyism in society, - take measures to prevent and counter anti-Roma hate speech in particular online through the Joint Code of Conduct with IT companies;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Urges the Commission and Member States to intensify their work with NGOs to deliver best practice training on countering prejudice as well as on effective counter speech campaigns through mapping NGO partners' specific needs and demands in this respect;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Calls on the Commission to launch a civil society monitoring and reporting call concerning hate speech, hate crime and Holocaust denial in the Member States;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Deplores the violation of the right of Roma to free movement; calls on Member States to acknowledge that the fundamental principles of the EU must apply to all citizens;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Calls on Member States to tackle the bias against Roma refugees and asylum seekers in the context of migration;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Condemns those Member States which carry out discriminatory birth registration and that fail to provide identity documents, resulting in Roma being denied access to all the essential basic services; calls on Member States to take immediate corrective measures ~~and active steps in this regard~~to stop discriminatory birth registration, and through their local authorities take active steps in this regard by moving the burden of registration from the parents to the responsible authorities; calls on the Commission to assess and monitor the situation in Member States and initiate legally binding legislation on the identification and protection of people whose citizenship have not been recognised and have no access to identity documents;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Is deeply concerned by the unequal access of Roma to health information, services and care, ~~and their racial abus~~the severe lack of health insurance cards among them, and their racial abuse; is alarmed by the discrimination of Roma women, who are often placed in segregated, sub-standard maternity wards, and face physical abuse, neglect, under- and mistreatment by medical staff when attempting to access sexual and reproductive healthcare services, and who often do not access mobile health screenings; urges Member States to set up a monitoring and corrective mechanism to this end immediately, and to ensure that medical personnel who violate ethics are held accountable;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Condemns Member States’' failure to secure Roma people’'s equal access to justice and their equality before the law taking shape - in the failure or in the unacceptably slow procedures of ensuring justice for the victims of hate crimes, especially those perpetrated by police officers, - in the disproportionate criminalisation and incarceration of Roma, - in over-policing (ethnic profiling, excessive stop-and-search procedures, uncalled-for raids on Roma settlements, arbitrary seizure and destruction of property, excessive use of force during arrests; assaults, threats, humiliating treatment, physical abuse, and the denial of rights during police interrogation and custody), - and in under-policing of crimes committed against Roma providing little or no assistance, protection (such as in cases of trafficking and for victims of domestic violence) or investigation in cases of crimes reported by Roma; calls on Member States to - provide mandatory, human rights-based and service-oriented, in-service training to law enforcement officers and officials in the judicial system at all levels, to- provide best practices on identifying and investigating hate crimes, including those motivated specifically by anti-Gypsyism, - set up anti-hate crime units with knowledge of anti-Gypsyism in police forces, - encourage appropriate policing and in cases of police misconduct, to apply sanctions, - recruit dispute resolution professionals for work with police, - actively recruit Roma as members of the police force, - ensure that victim support programs address the specific needs of Roma~~, that~~ and assistance is provided to them when reporting crimes and filing complaints, and to- continue and to extend the geographic scope of JUSTROM ~~programm~~, a joint Commission- CoE programme on Roma women's access to justice;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Calls on CEPOL to continue the provision of trainings in the field of fundamental rights and the related intersectional sensitisation of the police force;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Is deeply concerned about widespread discrimination in ~~housing~~the field of housing characterised by a discriminatory rental and property ownership market, and social housing system, forced evictions and demolitions of the homes of Roma without the provision of adequate alternative housing, the placement of Roma in segregated camps and emergency shelters cut off from basic services, the erection of walls around Roma settlements, and the failure of public authorities to secure Roma people's full access to daily potable tap water and to sewage systems; calls on Member States to take immediate steps to utilise the EU funds at hand to improve the housing situation of the Roma; calls on the Commission to recognise its competence in the context of racially motivated forced evictions; calls for an increase in the number and availability of desegregation experts in the Member States most concerned in order to support authorities in ensuring that European structural and investment funds effectively promote desegregation, and calls for the European Social Fund and the European Regional Development Fund (ESF-ERDF) to be earmarked for spatial desegregation measures;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Deplores continuing school segregation~~; calls on Member States to take desegregation measures using adequate resource, paying attention also to intersectional discrimin~~, including the overrepresentation of Roma children in "special schools", Roma-only schools, separate classes, "container schools", etc.; calls on Member States to draw up and take specific school desegregation measures, paying attention also to intersectional discrimination, with the involvement of Roma experts and school mediators, and ensure adequate resource for such measures; calls on the Commission to continue launching infringement proceedings against all the Member States, without exception, which fail to secure equal access to high-quality integrated education services to Roma at all levels of education;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Considers the discrimination of Roma in ~~employment~~the field of employment, most often characterised by long-term unemployment, zero-hour contracts, precarious employment conditions which lack medical and social insurance or pensions, labour market barriers (existing even for Roma with tertiary education) and the lack of re-training possibilities, alarming;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19 a. Calls for Member States to engage with the private sector on the development of public-private partnerships to support educational, employment and business opportunities for Roma, especially in growing technology sectors;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19 b. Notes the importance of early STEM education, especially for women and girls; calls on Member States to work with the private sector to advance science, technology and innovation initiatives for young Roma;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. ~~Urges the Commission and Member States to pay special attention to~~Condemns multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination in case of Roma women, men, children, elderly people, LGBTI people, disabled people and based on national origin; urges the Commission and Member States to pay special attention to improving educational attainment, participation, the access to employment, housing, healthcare and to the prevention of discrimination in case of Roma facing multiple and intersectional discrimination and inequality;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20 a. Regards equality bodies as vital to inform Roma about their rights, assist them in exercising their rights and report on discrimination; calls on the Commission to establish standards to secure that equality bodies have adequate powers and resources to monitor and act on cases of anti-Gypsyism; calls on Member States to ensure necessary powers, resources and independence to equality bodies;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Is concerned about the low level of participation of Roma people as interlocutors with or seated representatives of local, regional and national governments and the failure of governments to guarantee their exercise of full citizenship; it is the responsibility of governmental institutions and political parties to ensure the political participation and empowerment of Roma and their recruitment into public administrations;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls on Member States to provide mandatory, practical and intersectional fundamental rights and non-discrimination- related trainings for all public officials, who are duty bearers and key to the correct implementation of EU and Member State legislation, in order to equip them with the necessary knowledge and skills to be able to serve all citizens from a human rights-based perspective;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5

Putting anti-Gypsyism at the forefront of an improved post-2020 strategy

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Commission to - continue the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies after 2020, tobuilding on the findings and recommendations of the Court of Auditors, the FRA, NGOs and watchdog organisations; - place anti-Gypsyism in ~~its~~the focus of the post-2020 EU Framework and to introduce anti-discrimination indicators in the ~~relevant fields; calls furthermore on the Commission to~~fields of education, employment, housing, health, etc., as anti-Gypsyism undermines the successful implementation of National Roma Integration Strategies; - treat anti-Gypsyism as a horizontal issue, and to develop – in partnership with Member States, the FRA and NGOs – an inventory of practical steps for Member States to combat ~~it, and to set up a Commissioner-level project team on Roma issues~~anti-Gypsyism; - complete the Roma Task Force of relevant Commission services by setting up a Commissioner-level project team on Roma issues, bringing together all the relevant commissioners working in the field of equal rights and non- discrimination, citizenship, social rights, employment, education and culture, health, housing, and their external dimension, in order to safeguard the creation of non- discriminatory and complementary EU funds and programmes; - to complement the work of the Non- discrimination and Roma coordination unit of the Commission by employing a coordinator on fighting anti-Gypsyism and on Holocaust remembrance;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25 a. Calls on EU institutions, such as the Commission, EP, the EEAS, EESC, CoR, FRA, etc., to actively recruit Roma employees and trainees, and support the retention of Roma in public administration;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Calls on all political groups in Parliament and political parties in the Member States to respect the revised charter of European political parties for a non-racist society, and to condemn and sanction hate speech;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/2038(INI)

Soraya POST, Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN, Bodil VALERO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights to prepare a study on anti-Gypsyism in the EU and candidate countries, to focus on anti- Gypsyism during their work on Roma issues and to monitor it in all relevant fields;

2017/07/19
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12 a (new)

(12a) Children and vulnerable persons merit specific protection with regard to their personal data, as they may be less aware of the risks, consequences and safeguards concerned and their rights in relation to the processing of personal data. The interoperability components should pay particular attention to the protection of children and ensure that their rights and integrity are being fully respected.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) In order to ensure the correct identification of a person, Member State authorities competent for preventing and combating irregular migration and competent authorities within the meaning of Article 3(7) of Directive 2016/680 should be allowed to query the common identity repository (CIR) with the biometric data of that person taken during an identity check. Such query should be carried out in principle in the presence of the person, solely where a Member State police authority was unable to identify a person on the basis of a travel document or with the identity data provided by that person following rules and procedures provided for in national law or where there are doubts as to the authenticity of the travel document or the identity of its holder or where the person is unable or refuses to cooperate, or where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person is not telling the truth about his or her identity. Such query should not be allowed against minors under the age of 12 years old.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27 a (new)

(27a) In order to identify unknown persons who are not able to identify themselves or unidentified human remains, in the event of a disaster or an accident, Member States should be allowed to query the CIR with the biometric data of those persons.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 55

(55) To support the purposes of statistics and reporting, it is necessary to grant access to authorised staff of the competent authorities, institutions and bodies identified in this Regulation and the integration of the existing national systems and infrastructures with those components to consult certain data related to certain interoperability components without enabling individual identification.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57 a (new)

(57a) It would be appropriate that, during the development phase of the interoperability components, the Commission assess the necessity of further harmonisation of national systems and infrastructures of Member States at external borders. Those recommendations should also include an impact assessment and an assessment on their cost for the EU budget.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. This Regulation, together with [Regulation 2018/xx on interoperability borders and visa], establishes a framework to ensure the interoperability between the Entry/Exit System (EES), the Visa Information System (VIS), [the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS)], Eurodac, the Schengen Information System (SIS), and [the European Criminal Records Information System for third-country nationals (ECRIS-TCN)] in order for those systems and data contained in those systems to supplement each other.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

(ca) improving judicial cooperation in the areas of freedom, security and justice;

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

(ea) contribute to the prevention, detection and investigation of terrorist offences or of other serious criminal offences.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – title

5 Non-discrimination and fundamental rights

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

The protection of natural persons in relation to the processing of personal data is a fundamental right. Article 8(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and Article 16(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provide that everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her. Processing of personal data for the purposes of this Regulation by any user shall not result in discrimination against persons on any grounds such as sex, colour, social, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, ~~disability, age or sexual orientation. It shall fully respect human dignity and integrity~~political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, genetic features, language, disability, age or sexual orientation. It shall fully respect human dignity and integrity and fundamental rights, including the right to respect for one’s private life and to the protection of personal data. Particular attention shall be paid to children, the elderly and persons with a disability. The best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2017/0352(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. A European search portal (ESP) is established for the purposes of ensuring that Member State authorities and EU bodies have fast, seamless, efficient, systematic and controlled access to the EU information systems, the Europol data and the Interpol databases that they need to perform their tasks in accordance with their access rights and of supporting the objectives of the EES, the VIS, [the ETIAS], Eurodac, the SIS, [the ECRIS- TCN system] and the Europol data, while fully respecting the principles of necessity and proportionality.

2018/07/24
Committee: LIBE

2016/10/04
Committee: JURI

2016/0282(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 9 – subparagraph 2a

“The priorities established for each of the ESI Funds in the Fund specific rules shall in particular cover the appropriate use of each Fund in the areas of migration and asylum, in particular in relation to the reception of asylum seekers and the participation in the corrective allocation mechanism under the Dublin Regluation.”

2017/03/13
Committee: REGI

2016/0282(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Chapter IV – heading

~~Measures linked to sound economic governance~~5a. The heading of Chapter IV is replaced by the following: “Measures linked to sound economic governance and solidarity among Member States in the reception of asylum seekers”

2017/03/13
Committee: REGI

2016/0282(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Matthijs van MILTENBURG

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)

Procedural time limits shall not start before the appointment of a guardian

2017/06/26
Committee: LIBE

Angelika MLINAR, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point d – indent 2 – paragraph 2

depending on the circumstances in the country of origin, the concept ~~might~~shall include a group based on a common characteristic of sexual orientation (a term which cannot be understood to include acts considered to be criminal in accordance with national law of the Member States); gender related aspects, including gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics, shall be given due consideration for the purposes of determining membership of a particular social group or identifying a characteristic of such a group;

2017/03/27
Committee: LIBE

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a

Directive (EU) 2015/849
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a – point i – subparagraph 2 a

“"For the purposes of Article 13(1)(b) and Article 30 of this Directive, the indication of ownership or control set out in the second subparagraph is reduced to 10% ~~whenever the legal entity is a Passive Non-Financial Entity as defined in Directive 2011/16/EU~~”;

2016/12/14
Committee: JURI

2016/0208(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)

Directive (EU) 2015/849
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a – point ii

(aa) in point (6) (a), point (ii) is replaced by the following: “(ii) if, after having exhausted all possible means ~~and~~, the entity fails to provided the~~re are no grounds for suspicion, no person under point (i) is identified, or if there is any doubt that the person(s) identified are the beneficial owner(s), the~~ identity of any natural person who meets the criteria set out in point (i), the obliged entities shall record that no beneficial owner exists and keep records of the actions taken in order to identify the beneficial ownership under point (i). Where there is any doubt that the person(s) identified are the beneficial owner(s), a record of that doubt shall be made. In addition, obliged entities shall identify and verify the identity of the relevant natural person~~(s)~~ who holds the position of senior managing official(s), the obliged entities shall keep records of the actions taken in order to identify the beneficial ownership under point (i) and this point; content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32015L0849&qid=1481283067634&from=EN), who shall be identified as the "senior manager" (and not as "beneficial owner"), and record details of all legal owners of the entity;” Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

2016/12/14
Committee: JURI

2016/0208(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2015/849
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)

(4a) in Article 13(1), the following point is added: “(aa) screening the customer’s and beneficial owner’s names against the EU, UN and other relevant sanctions lists;”

2016/12/14
Committee: JURI

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5 – point a

Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Member States shall inform the Commission, the regulatory authorities of other Member States and ERGA about more detailed or stricter rules adopted in accordance with paragraph 1.

2016/11/11
Committee: JURI

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 9

Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 6a – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that audiovisual media service providers provide sufficient information to viewers about content which may impair the physical, or mental ~~or moral~~ development of minors. For this purpose, Member States may use a system of descriptors indicating the nature of the content of an audiovisual media service.

2016/11/11
Committee: JURI

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21

Directive 2010/13/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall ensure that national regulatory authorities exercise their powers impartially and transparently and in accordance with the objectives of this Directive, in particular media pluralism, non-discrimination, cultural diversity, consumer protection, internal market and the promotion of fair competition.

2016/11/11
Committee: JURI

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 21

National regulatory authorities shall not seek or take instructions from any other body, public or private, in relation to the exercise of the tasks assigned to them under national law implementing Union law. This shall not prevent supervision in accordance with national constitutional law.

2016/11/11
Committee: JURI

2016/0151(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4

4. Following the notification of the decision to launch the common action pursuant to paragraph 2, where a competent authority dec~~ides not~~lines to take part in the common action~~, it shall without delay~~ based on the reasons laid down in paragraph 3, it shall inform the Commission and the other competent authorities concerned about its decision~~, state the reasons for it pursuant to~~ without undue delay. In this case, it shall indicate one of the reasons laid down in paragraph 3 and provide the necessary supporting documents.

2017/02/06
Committee: JURI

2016/0148(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 a (new)

Article 50 a Reporting Every two years, starting from the date of entry into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a report specifying coordinated actions taken due to widespread infringements with cross- border dimensions as laid down in Article 16, the enforcement measures taken in cases of coordinated actions according to Article 18, as well as containing a list of special cases of common action launched by the Commission based on Article 21, the commitments taken by infringing traders and its results as well as the enforcement measures taken according to Article 25. The report shall be publicly available and shall include further legislative or non- legislative proposals if necessary in order to adapt to new technological developments or potential future phenomena in the digital environment.

2017/02/06
Committee: JURI

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) examine his or her application for international protection as Member State responsible, unless, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10 to(1) to 10(4), 13 and 16 to 18, a different Member State is responsible for examining the application;

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

2016/0133(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) where, according to the criteria set out in Articles 10(1) to 10(4), to 13 and 16 to 18 a different Member State is responsible for examining the application, the Member State of allocation shall request that other Member State to take charge of the applicant;

2017/05/05
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)

6a. The European Union Agency for Asylum should be given enough financial resources and staff to guarantee that it is independent and can carry out its duties properly, including, specifically, the Agency’s own staff to set up teams of experts responsible for evaluating and monitoring procedures for asylum and reception systems.

2016/09/15
Committee: BUDG

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. In order to carry out its task of monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the Common European Asylum System and the Member States’ asylum and reception systems in an effective, impartial and independent manner, the Agency shall have an appropriate number of permanent and temporary staff and adequate financial resources.

2016/09/15
Committee: BUDG

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

The multi-annual programming shall list the Member States whose asylum and reception systems shall be monitored each year, ensuring that each Member State shall be monitored at least once in every ~~five~~two-year period.

2016/09/15
Committee: BUDG

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3

3. The Executive Director shall transmit the draft report of the team of experts to the Member State concerned, which shall provide its comments on that draft report. The Executive Director shall then submit the draft report, taking into account the comments of the Member State concerned, to the Management Board. The Management Board shall adopt the monitoring report and transmit it to the Commission and the European Parliament.

2016/09/15
Committee: BUDG

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

2. The Agency shall~~, at the request of~~ provide the Commission~~, provide it~~ with information on specific third countries which could be considered for inclusion inor removal from the common EU list of safe countries of origin in accordance with Regulation (EU) No XXX/XXX.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

The European Parliament, the Council or the Commission may request the Agency to carry out a review of the situation in any such third country with a view to assess whether the relevant conditions and criteria set out in that Directive are respected.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The Agency may, in particular, base its assessment on information provided by Member States, information analysis on the situation of asylum developed by the Agency, on-site visits, information provided by applicants, and case sampling.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

In order to assist in these duties the agency may conduct unannounced on-site visits without prior notification to the Member State concerned. General guidelines on practical arrangements for such visits shall be established by the Commission in close cooperation with the Member States.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

The multi-annual programming shall list the Member States whose asylum and reception systems shall be monitored each year, ensuring that each Member State shall be monitored at least once in every ~~fiv~~three-year period.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5

The Agency ~~may~~shall initiate a monitoring exercise for the assessment of the asylum or reception systems of a Member State on its own initiative or at the request of the Commission whenever there are serious concerns regarding the functioning of any aspect of that Member State's asylum or reception systems.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3

3. The Executive Director shall transmit the draft report of the team of experts to the Member State concerned, which shall provide its comments on that draft report. The Executive Director shall then submit the draft report, taking into account the comments of the Member State concerned, to the Management Board. The Management Board shall adopt the monitoring report and transmit it to the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 a (new)

Article 14 a Liaison officers 1. In order to assist the agency in carrying out its duties under Articles 13 and 14 the Agency shall ensure regular monitoring of the management by Member State of the CEAS through liaison officers of the Agency. The Agency may decide that a liaison officer covers up to four Member States which are geographically close to each other. 2. The Executive Director shall appoint experts from the staff of the Agency to be deployed as liaison officers. The Executive Director shall, in consultation with the Member States concerned, make a proposal on the nature and terms of the deployment and the Member State or region to which a liaison officer may be deployed. The proposal from the Executive Director shall be subject to approval by the Management Board. The Executive Director shall notify the Member State concerned of the appointment and shall determine, together with the Member State, the location of deployment. 3. Liaison officers shall act on behalf of the Agency and shall foster cooperation and dialogue between the Agency and the national authorities responsible for the application of the CEAS, in particular the authorities in charge of processing asylum applications. Liaison officers shall, in particular: (a) act as an interface between the Agency and the national authorities responsible for asylum; (b) support the collection of information referred to in Articles 13 and 14 and information required by the Agency; (c) contribute to promoting the application of the Union acquis relating to the management of the CEAS, including with regard to respect for fundamental rights; (d) assist, where possible, the Member States in preparing their contingency planning for measures to be taken to deal with possible disproportionate pressure on their asylum and reception systems; (e) facilitate communication between the Member State concerned and the Agency, share relevant information from the Agency with the Member State concerned, including information about ongoing operations; (f) report regularly to the Executive Director on the capacity of the Member State concerned to deal effectively with its obligations under the CEAS; Where the liaison officer's reports referred to in point (f) raise concerns about one or more aspects relevant for the Member State concerned, the Member State concerned shall be informed without delay by the Executive Director. 4. In carrying out their duties, the liaison officers shall take instructions only from the Agency.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

1. Where, after the period referred to in Article 14(5), the Member State concerned has not fully implemented the action plan ~~and the shortcomings in the asylum and reception systems are so serious that they jeopardize the functioning of the CEAS~~, the Commission shall, based on its own assessment of the implementation of the action plan and the seriousness of the shortcomings, adopt recommendations addressed to that Member State outlining the measures needed to remedy the serious shortcomings, and where necessary setting out the measures to be taken by the Agency to support that Member State.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point g

(g) ~~assist with~~perform its tasks and obligations with regards to the relocation or transfer of beneficiaries ofand applicants for international protection within the Union in accordance with the provisions of regulation xxx/xxx [Dublin regulation];

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point j a (new)

(j a) provide any additional form of operational and technical assistance requested by the Member State in accordance with paragraph 1

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2

2. The Management Board shall, on a proposal of the Executive Director, decide ~~by a three-fourths majority of members with a right to vote on the profiles of experts and~~ on the share that each Member State shall contribute to constitute the asylum intervention pool. The same procedure shall apply to any subsequent changes in the profiles and the overall number of experts.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1

1. Where the asylum and reception systems of a Member State are subject to disproportionate pressure that places exceptionally heavy and urgent demands on those systems, the Agency shall, at the request of the Member State concerned or on its own initiative, organise and coordinate a comprehensive set of operational and technical measures as referred to in Article 16 and deploy experts from the asylum intervention pool referred to in Article 18 ~~and~~, experts from its own staff and where necessary additional technical equipment to reinforce the asylum and reception systems within a short period of time.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 a (new)

Article 22a Resettlement assistance provided by the Agency The Agency may provide Member States with resettlement assistance, in particular during the establishment of the EU Resettlement Framework. To that end, the Agency may set up teams of resettlement experts. The arrangements for the provision of assistance by the Agency shall be governed by Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX (EU Resettlement Framework).

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

(ea) performing its tasks under Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX (EU Resettlement Framework), wherever necessary;

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)

(ga) performing its tasks under Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX (EU Resettlement Framework), wherever necessary;

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1

1. In matters related to its activities and, to the extent required for the fulfilment of its tasks, the Agency shall facilitate and encourage operational cooperation between Member States and third countries, within the framework of the Union's external relations policy, including with regard to the protection of fundamental rights, and in cooperation with the European External Action Service. The Agency and the Member States shall promote and comply with norms and standards equivalent to those set by Union legislation, including the EU charter of Fundamental Rights, the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention and its 1967 protocol, also when carrying out activities on the territory of those third countries.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3

3. The Agency may, with the agreement of the host Member State, invite officials from third countries to observe the operational and technical measures outlined in Article 16(3), where their presence does not jeopardise the achievement of objectives of those measures, and where it may contribute to improving cooperation and the exchange of best practices.deleted

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1

1. The Management Board shall be composed of one representative from each Member State, two representatives of the European Parliament and two representatives of the Commission, which shall have the right to vote.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3

3. The Mmanagement Bboard may establish a~~n E~~ small-sized executive Bboard, ~~composed of the Chairperson of the Management Board, the two representatives of the Commission to~~to assist it and the executive director with regard to the preparation of the decisions, programmes and activities to be adopted by the Mmanagement Bboard and t~~hree other members~~o take certain provisional, urgent decisions on behalf of the Mmanagement Bboard~~, to assist it and t~~ when necessary. The Eexecutive ~~Director with regard to the preparation of~~board shall not take decisions, th~~e annual and multi-annual programming and activities to be adopted by~~at must be passed by either a two-thirds or three-quarters majority of the Mmanagement Bboard. WThe~~n necessary, because of urgency,~~ management board may delegate certain clearly defined tasks to the Eexecutive Bboard ~~may take certain provisional decisions on behalf of the Management Board, in particular on administrativ~~, in particular where this improves the efficiency of the Agency. It may not delegate to the executive board tasks related to decisions that must be passed by either a two-thirds or three-quarters majority of the management ~~matters.~~ board.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 5 – point o a (new)

(o a) submitting reports on compliance with the duty to cooperate in good faith to the Management Board and the European Commission in accordance with article 3(4)

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

~~On a proposal by t~~The Executive Director~~, the Management Board~~ shall decide on the composition and working methods of the Consultative Forum, including thematic or geographic-focused consultation groups, and the modalities of transmission of information to the Consultative Forum.

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0131(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Article XXX shall apply from [Date]

2016/10/27
Committee: LIBE

2016/0062(NLE)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas significant cultural differences exist between Member States concerning women´s tendency to report rape or sexual assault and that official statistics reflect this tendency more than the factual number of rapes or sexual assaults committed in a country;

2017/05/11
Committee: LIBE FEMM

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. whereas ~~the~~a humanitarian crisis is affecting more than 65.3 million ‘displaced’ persons1 ~~means that the distinction between~~fleeing conflict and persecution; whereas movements of persons are often made up of people in need of international protection and migrants ~~is becoming increasingly difficult to draw~~, and this generally complicates the situation; _________________ 1 http://www.unhcr.org/news/latest/2016/6/5 763b65a4/global-forced-displacement-hits- record-high.html

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. recalls that migration is a global phenomenon which requires discussion and coordination at global level; takes the view that structured and continuous dialogue with countries of origin, transit and destination of refugees and migrants is therefore necessary; notes that EU cooperation with these countries has been strengthened and redefined, as the Communication Commission of 7 June 2016 stated; stresses that the principal aim of this cooperation must be to the responsible management of migration flows while promoting standards governing European migration policy that are chiefly focused on upholding fundamental rights.

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. welcomes the reference in the Commission communication of 7 June 2016 to the need to adopt each new pact to suit the situation in each third country concerned; notes the will for these pacts to reflect the many-faceted nature of EU policy; therefore calls for the relevant committees at Parliament to be kept duly informed of the steps taken to conclude any new pact to enable Parliament to vote on the applicable instruments envisaged to suit the specific conditions of each third country concerned.

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. stresses that, when justified by the situation in the third country concerned, the pacts should address, as soon as possible, the issue of resettlement or other legal channels for granting international protection within the EU;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes the New York Declaration of 19 September 2016, and welcomes the will to seal two global compacts on refuges and migrants by 2018; calls on the EU to coordinate the involvement of the Member States in the drafting of these compacts; takes the view in this connection that the EU should prioritise stepping up global resettlement efforts, thereby ensuring that the international community takes its responsibilities in respect of resettlement needs worldwide; calls, therefore, for swift progress on the file on the EU framework for resettlement in order to maximise the EU’s influence in this area;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Calls on the European Union to open up legal and safe routes for migrants and refugee~~Stresses that the fight against irregular migration must go hand-in- hand with the establishment and strengthening of legal migration channels; calls, therefore, on the European Union to open up legal and safe routes for migrants and refugees; recalls in this regard the position of the European Parliament, expressed in its resolution of 12 April 2016, that an EU resettlement scheme is required to find homes for a significant number of refugees, given global resettlement needs;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls for international protection to be provided ~~to people fleeing conflicts~~, including through resettlement programmes and humanitarian visas; takes note of the Commission's proposal regarding the establishment of a Union framework on resettlement but calls for work to continue at EU level on the creation and strengthening of legal routes that would be complementary to resettlement;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Reiterates Parliament’s position, expressed in its resolution of 12 April 2016, favouring EU readmission agreements over bilateral agreements concluded by Member States with third countries; recalls the recent drafting of a new European document on returns, and stresses that its recognition should be systematically promoted in any new readmission agreement;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Expresses its concern about~~Calls for greater vigilance regarding the treatment of migrants who are sent back to their country of origin or to a third country; takes the view that any dialogue on return and readmission, particularly in respect of readmission agreements, should systematically address the issue of the safe return and reintegration of migrants;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Reiterates the importance of cooperation with third countries in the fight against human trafficking and smugglers in order that networks can be tackled as far upstream as possible; stresses in this regard the need to strengthen judicial and police cooperation with these countries in order to identify and dismantle the networks; recalls furthermore the need to build up the capacities of these countries so that they can pursue and sanction in an effective manner those responsible; calls therefore for cooperation between the European Union, the Member States, Europol, Eurojust and the third countries concerned to be encouraged;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. States that human-trafficking and smuggler networks make full use of the Internet in carrying out their criminal activities and it is therefore vital that the European Union steps up its action, particularly within Europol and the IRU, and its cooperation with third countries in this regard;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2342(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Recalls to mind that traffickers may use legal migration routes to bring their victims to Europe; considers that the criteria third countries are required to meet prior to any visa liberalisation agreement with the European Union ought specifically to include cooperation by said third countries in combating human trafficking; calls on the Commission to pay special attention to both this issue and that of combating smugglers in all talks on negotiating these agreements;

2016/12/08
Committee: LIBE

2015/2326(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Welcomes the improved provision of information by the European Commission to citizens on monitoring the fact application of EU law through webpages, databases, simpler complaint forms and online problem-solving tools, which aim at increased transparency ;

2016/03/04
Committee: PETI

2015/2287(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. In order to improve transparency as regards first reading agreements commonly conducted in trilogues and deployed more and more frequently, underlines the importance of publishing the progress of negotiations after each trilogue and to opt for a plenary mandate of the EP negotiation team;

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2287(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Urges the Commission to establish a joint register for legislative procedures in order to facilitate the traceability of the legislative process;

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2287(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Sees it as a priority that EU institutions ensure full transparency when it comes to access to documents; stresses in this regard that besides access to documents also the debates in Council should be made public in order for citizens to understand how and why decisions have been taken;

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2287(INI)

Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Enrique CALVET CHAMBON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Urges the Council to review its policy on access to documents and align it with the relevant provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Invites all EU Member States to agree to a strong directive on the Accessibility of Public Sector Bodies' websites, which should include all websites providing public services, including where these are provided by private entities and/or funded, or partially funded, by public funds; mobile web and mobile applications; and downloadable documents (Word, PDF, etc.) which are extensively used in online processes;

2016/03/04
Committee: PETI

2015/2258(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 18

18. CNotes with profound indignation that seven EU Member States have formed a minority block which is impeding the process of ratifying the Marrakesh Treaty; calls for a swift ratification of the ~~Marrakesh~~ Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled, without making the ratification conditional upon the revision of the EU legal framework or upon the timing of the decision of the Court of Justice;

2016/03/04
Committee: PETI

2015/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Not~~Welcomes that the Ombudsman has made greater use of her power to open strategic investigations on her own initiative and has appointed an Own- Initiative Investigation Co-ordinator; considers that it has been crucial that the Ombudsman put the focus on transparency as a guarantee of good administration;

2015/11/10
Committee: PETI

2015/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s more forward-looking approach and the adoption of the new five-year strategy ‘Towards 2019’;

2015/11/10
Committee: PETI

2015/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Welcomes that the Ombudsman introduced a more strategic approach to tackle systematic issues and promoting good administration, including a working group to review the inquiry procedure to enhance their efficacy and effectiveness, a revised inquiry document template and new internal rules on whistleblowing; welcomes that the changes of administrative procedures already has created significant efficiency gains;

2015/11/10
Committee: PETI

2015/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Welcomes the enhanced transparency by publishing of the Public Register of documents online;

2015/11/10
Committee: PETI

2015/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Ombudsman to work closely with the European Patent Office, in particular with regard to potential breaches of the right to health and affordable healthcare due to restrictive patenting rules for innovative medicinal products;deleted

2015/11/10
Committee: PETI

2015/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas ~~workers’ rights to representation on company boards are recognised by the primary and secondary law of the EU,~~the representation of workers and employers, the information and consultation of workers as well as equality between men and women with regard to labour market opportunities and treatment at work, including salaries are mentioned in Article 153 TFEU and in the fifth paragraph of the Preamble of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union~~, and in Article 153 TFEU~~ referring to the Social Charters adopted by the European Union;

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission to provide a ~~coherent~~general framework ofor the ~~political and~~existing legislative instruments in the field of company law a~~lready in force in the field of workers’ participation~~s regards employee involvement;

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2222(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Antanas GUOGA, Viktor USPASKICH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Underlines the importance of recent EU legal instruments regulating the participation of workers~~Notes in this context the recent EU legislation, in particular Council Directive 2001/86/EC of 8 October 2001 supplementing the Statute for a European company with regard to the involvement of employees1, Council Directive 2003/72/EC of 22 July 2003 supplementing the Statute for a European Cooperative Society with regard to the involvement of employees2, and Directive 2005/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies3; __________________ 1 ~~2 3~~OJ L 294, 10.11.2001, p. 22. OJ L 294, 10.11.2001, p. 22. 2 OJ L 207, 18.8.2003, p. 25. OJ L 207, 18.8.2003, p. 25. 3 OJ L 310, 25.11.2005, p. 1. OJ L 310, 25.11.2005, p. 1.

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

~~3. Is worried about the impact that the proposal for a directive on single-member private limited liability companies could have on workers’ rights, in particular workers’ representation;~~deleted

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2222(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Antanas GUOGA, Viktor USPASKICH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Notes that labour law, workers participation in the management or supervisory bodies of the companies, the right to information and consultation, taxation accounting and insolvency proceedings are all outside the scope of the Commission proposal for a directive on single-member private limited liability companies;

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to ~~consider making a proposal on how to introduce permanent forms of workers’ participation, by ensuring common minimum standards for information, consultation and participation~~study the impact of the existing diversity of rules and practices in Member States as regards the manner in which employees' representatives are involved in decision- making within companies, and depending on the results of the study asks the Commission to envisage possible proposals on how to overcome these divergences;

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2222(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to define common minimum criteria for workers’ representation at board level, notably on the size of the company, on balanced gender representation, and on the extension of the right to participate in public and semi-public companies;deleted

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2222(INI)

Kaja KALLAS, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

~~7. Calls on the Commission to submit legislative proposals and financial instruments aimed at promoting enhanced information, participation and consultation of workers;~~deleted

2016/03/18
Committee: JURI

2015/2147(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the announced reform of the copyright framework, to improve access to digital content, adapt to the changes in users' behaviours, and make it fit for the digital age ; Calls for targeted, evidence- based reforms to enhance cross-border access to legally available online content ~~but~~, stresses the importance of not mandating pan- European licences~~; calls instead~~ but believes the Commission should reduce the complexity of pan-European licensing so that it is accessible to small businesses ; calls for reforms to enable the enhanced portability of legally acquired content to be prioritised;

2015/09/24
Committee: JURI

2015/2147(INI)

Kaja KALLAS, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses the importance of improving clarity and transparency of the copyright regime, in particular with regard to copyright levies;

2015/09/24
Committee: JURI

2015/2147(INI)

Kaja KALLAS, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Jean-Marie CAVADA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that ~~internet service providers should~~ the Commission, together with membear ~~greater responsibility for illegal content made available~~ states, should promote due diligence along the ~~internet and should, along with other actors in the supply chain such as payment providers, play a signif~~supply chain, including internet service providers, domain registrars and payment providers, as well exchange of best practices, guidelines and better public an~~t role in tackling copyright abuses~~d private sector cooperation to combat illegal content, tackling copyright abuses, and reduce divergences of enforcement across Europe;

2015/09/24
Committee: JURI

2015/2147(INI)

Kaja KALLAS, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that uniform copyright enforcement across Member states is important and therefore calls for a modernised European approach to the enforcement of intellectual property rights online, particularly with regard to commercial- scale infringement;

2015/09/28
Committee: JURI

2015/2147(INI)

Kaja KALLAS, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that the announced ICT standardisation plan should also aim at enabling multidevice interoperability;

2015/09/28
Committee: JURI

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses the need for a permanent EU wide resettlement program with mandatory participation by all Member States providing resettlement for a meaningful number of refugees having regard to the overall number of refugees seeking protection in the EU;

2015/07/24
Committee: PETI

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on Member States to make use of the existing possibilities offered by the existing legislation to provide for humanitarian visas at EU embassies and consular offices in countries of origin, transit countries or so called ‘hot spots’ in third countries;

2015/07/24
Committee: PETI

2015/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Calls on the Commission to put forward a revision of the Temporary Protection Directive to introduce a tool for an immediate, safe and legal response to urgent refugee crisis like the one currently happening in Syria, in this context also calls for a clear definition of what constitutes a ‘mass influx’ of refugees;

2015/07/24
Committee: PETI

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3d. Calls for the mutual recognition of asylum decisions between Member States not only in cases where the decision is negative but also in cases where asylum is granted in order to properly implement the provisions of Article 87(2)(a) of the TFEU which calls for a uniform status of asylum valid throughout the Union;

2015/07/24
Committee: PETI

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

F a. whereas the on-going refugee crisis has highlighted the disproportionate responsibilities placed on certain Member States situated on the external borders of the European Union and the need to establish a sharing of responsibilities with regards to the reception of asylum seekers as well as the management of the EU external border;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas migrant smuggling, trafficking and labour exploitation are distinct legal phenomena, tackled by distinct legal frameworks at the EU and international level, requiring properly targeted responses, while often overlapping in practice; and whereas criminal smuggling and trafficking networks can change their modus operandi very quickly, thus requiring rapidly adapted responses based on the most recent and accurate data; Whereas efforts to counter the smuggling of migrants should not affect those that are providing humanitarian assistance to irregular migrants;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

H a. whereas the creation of safe and legal routes to the EU for both asylum seekers and economic migrants is the most efficient way to fight smugglers and save lives;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Recital U a (new)

U a. whereas EASO disposes of a staff of 75 people, which is very limited with regards to the number of tasks it has to accomplish;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Recital V a (new)

V a. whereas the multifaceted character of the internal and external aspects of the migratory policy necessitates a coordinated and concerted approach by all affected European actors; whereas all affected commissioners and their respective administrations should ensure that all necessary efforts are being made to increase their cooperation in order to ensure a coherent and efficient migratory policy on the European level;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes that an effective guardianship and a child-sensitive protection systems are key to preventing abuse, neglect and exploitation of children deprived of parental care; stresses the importance of defining EU guidelines for an harmonized guardianship systems aimed at providing adequate support and protection and at granting that foreign and national children are treated equally;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Underlines that efforts should be made to enhance the capacities of Member States to investigate and prosecute migrant smuggling networks notably through stronger coordination between law enforcement and judiciary structures in the European Union and the sharing of information between Member States and with EU Agencies;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. ~~Is of the opinion that, in addition to~~Notes the criteria contained in the Relocation Decisions, namely the GDP of the Member State, the population of the Member State, the unemployment rate in the Member State, and the past numbers of asylum seekers in the Member ~~State, consideration should be given to two other criteria, namely, the size of the territory of the Member State and the population density of the Member~~ State;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Supports the creation, in the framework of the reforms of the Visa Code, of a humanitarian visa which should allow its holder to enter into the territory of the Member State that has issued it for the sole purpose of asking for international protection in accordance with definitions of article 2(a) of the directive 2011/95/EU;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Regrets the existence of strong disparities between Member States with regards to the recognition rates for asylum requests, the lengths of the procedures and the access to education, social rights and the labour market; Recommends therefore a revision of the asylum procedures directive with a view to increase the harmonisation between Member States of the reception conditions, the procedural deadlines, access to education, the labour market and social rights;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)

27b. Calls for an increased sharing of best practices within the field of reception conditions and asylum procedures and suggests in this context to make use especially of the experience within local and regional authorities;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Observes that the operation of the Dublin III Regulation10 has raised many questions linked to fairness and solidarity in the allocation of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection; notes that the current system does not take into sufficient consideration the particular migratory pressure faced by Member States situated at the Union’s external borders; believes that the ~~European Union~~Member States needs to accept the on-going difficulties with the Dublin logic, and tohat the European Union should develop options for solidarity both among ~~its~~ Member States and the migrants concerned; __________________ 10 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast) (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31).

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Points out that the pressure placed on the system – as established by the Dublin Regulation – by the rising number of migrants arriving in the Union has shown that, as implemented, the system has largely failed to achieve its two primary goals of establishing objective and fair criteria for allocation of responsibility and of providing swift access to international protection; Further points out that these failures have been present also before the current crisis and that the effects have only been exacerbated by it;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. ~~Points out that one option for~~Considers that a fundamental overhaul of the Dublin system wshould binclude tohe establishment of a central collection of applications at Union level – viewing each asylum seeker as someone seeking asylum in the Union as a whole and not in an individual Member State – and to establish a central system for the allocation of responsibility for any persons seeking asylum in the Union; ~~suggest~~considers that such a system could ~~provide for certain relative thresholds per Member State, above which no further allocation of responsibility could be made until all other Member State~~function on the basis of a number of Union ‘hotspots’ from where Union distribution should principally take place; Considers tha~~ve met their own thresholds,~~t the same rules which cwould ~~conceivably help in deterring secondary movements,~~apply for distribution for asn a~~ll Member States would be fully involv~~pplication submitted in a hot spot should be applied inf the ~~centralised system an~~asylum seeker has travelled nto ~~longer have individual responsibility for allocation of applicants to other Member States; believe~~a country where there are no hot spots in order to submit his or her application; considers thus that ~~such~~an a sy~~stem could function on the basis of a number of Union ‘hotspots’ from where Union distribution should take place~~lum seeker should not be able to affect the chances of a particular Member State examining his or her application by travelling there in order to submit the application; underlines that any new system for allocation of responsibility must incorporate the key concepts of family unity and the best interests of the child;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35a. Considers that a transitional period should be introduced in the system to distribute asylum seekers between Member States in order to give Member States that have not historically been the primary destinations for asylum seekers a chance to ensure good standards with regards to inter alia reception facilities and administrative capacities related to the provision of asylum procedures with full respect of European and international law; Suggests that such a transitional period should imply that these countries would gradually take on the full responsibility for receiving asylum seekers foreseen by the repartition key;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)

40 a. Notes that an inclusive society should be built with the participation of all the actors involved in that society and therefore suggests that even though integration is a competence of the Member States the exchange of best practices in the field of integration is strengthened, inter alia through the creation of a network for the sharing of best practices and relevant data at the local level;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 b (new)

40 b. Calls on the European Commission to organise an annual Structured Dialogue on Integration together with the European Committee of the Regions with a view to draw up, review, and update guidelines for local and regional authorities across the continent in order to ensure smooth integration;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 c (new)

40 c. Underlines that integration can be enhanced through reception policies for asylum-seekers which promote social inclusion, rather than isolation and separation from host communities; recalls the key role local and regional authorities play in this regard, and thus, calls on Member States to resource local and regional authorities appropriately according to their needs and to allow for their contribution to sharing best practices at EU level;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 d (new)

40 d. Considers that language, accommodation and employment are vital for integration; Considers therefore that language training should be provided upon commencement of the asylum procedure, unless it is reasonably foreseen that the asylum-seeker will stay in the country for a period not exceeding a few weeks, as it facilitates the active participation of children in school, is important for accessing employment in the host country and may also be a valuable additional asset upon return home;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 e (new)

40 e. Underlines the large number of minors among the migrants; insists on the importance of ensuring a maximum level of continuity in their schooling when arriving on the European territory; recalls that this constitutes a vital condition for their wellbeing and their integration in their new environment;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48

48. Understands that the safe return of those people who, following an individual assessment of their asylum application, are determined not to be eligible for protection in the Union is something that must be carried out as part of the proper implementation of the CEAS; in this regard, welcomes the EU action plan on returns;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49

49. Acknowledges that, in the light of the fact that, in 2014, only 36 % of third country nationals who were ordered to leave the Union were effectively returned, there is a need to improve the effectiveness of the Union’s return system; Considers that in order to ensure a better execution of return decisions they should as far as possible be conducted at a European level with operational assistance provided by Frontex;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)

49 a. Considers that in order to increase the efficiency of readmissions, and in order to ensure the coherence of returns at a European level, it will be necessary to favour European readmission agreements over bilateral agreements between Member States and third countries; considers that the conclusion and implementation of those agreements will require high level political dialogues and conditional development funding to support the reintegration of returnees in their countries of origin;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50

50. Believes that the return of migrants should only be carried out safely, in full compliance with the fundamental and procedural rights of the migrants in question, and where the country to which they are being returned is safe for them; reiterates, in that regard, that voluntary return should be prioritised over forced returns; Believes that where forced returns take place, all the Member states need to perform an effective return monitoring according to Art.8 (6) of the Return Directive;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50 a (new)

50 a. Notes that there is no EU policy or legal framework protecting the basic rights of persons who are not removed; regrets that the safeguards set forth in article 14(1) of the Return Directive for non-removed persons do not cover all rights and apply only if removal is formally postponed; calls on EU institutions and Member States to address the situation of migrants in an irregular situation who have been given a return decision but who have not been removed and to provide for a mechanism to put an end to situations of legal limbo that derive from protracted situations of non- removability;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52

52. Acknowledges that the main purpose of the recent Commission proposal for a Union list of safe countries of origin, amending the Asylum Procedures Directive13 is to more efficiently distinguish migrants who are in clear need of international protection and therefore more likely to succeed in their asylum applications from those who are leaving their country for other reasons which do not fall under the right of asylum; observes that if such a Union list would become obligatory for Member States it could, in principle, be an important tool for facilitating the asylum process, including return; __________________ 13 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ L180, 29.6.2013, p. 60).

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52 a (new)

52 a. Considers that for the establishment of a European list of safe countries of origin to effectively meets its objectives and arrive at a faster treatment of asylum requests, it would be appropriate to revise the asylum procedures directive in order to harmonise the procedural deadlines of the accelerated procedures between different Member States.

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53 a (new)

53 a. Considers that the establishment of a list of safe countries of origin of the Union should progressively put an end to national lists of safe countries of origin, except with regards to exceptional cases encountered by a Member State.

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61

61. ~~Understands that~~Welcomes the recently proposed European Border and Coast Guard is intended to replace Frontex and which is meant to ensure a European integrated border management at the external borders with a view to managing migration effectively and ensuring a high level of internal security within the Union, while safeguarding the free movement of persons therein; Underlines in that regard that Member States which have a frontline role and external border with third countries, but which are not part of the Schengen area, must also be able to participate and benefit from the establishment of the European Border and Coast Guard on equal footing with the Schengen area Member States;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 a (new)

61 a. Notes that the capacity of Frontex to deal with possible violations of fundamental rights should be strengthened in the context of expanding its role under EU law; Believes that Frontex should deal with individual complaints regarding infringements of fundamental rights in the course of its operations and should provide adequate administrative support for that purpose; calls on Frontex to set up an appropriate complaints mechanism, including within the framework of its working arrangements concluded with the competent authorities of third countries;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63

63. Recalls that, since the establishment of the Schengen Area, the Union is an area without internal borders, that the Schengen Member States have developed a step-by- step common policy towards the Schengen external borders, and that the inherent logic of such a system has always been that the abolishment of internal border controls has to go hand in hand with compensatory measures strengthening the external borders of the Schengen Area and the mandatory and systematic sharing of information through the Schengen Information System (‘SIS’) including on return decisions;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 a (new)

70 a. Calls on the Commission to ensure an effective cooperation between these agencies; and ensure that they have concluded operational agreements enabling them to ensure effective, proportionate and justified exchange of data;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71

71. Points out, in that regard, that the Union agencies require the resources necessary to allow them to fulfil their assigned tasks; calls on the Commission to provide updated and consolidated information on the needs of the agencies; asks the Commission to propose a medium and long term strategy regarding the actions of the agencies in the field of justice and home affairs: objectives, tasks, coordination, Hotspots and financial resources; insists that the Union agencies and the Member States keep the Parliament fully informed of work undertaken at the hotspots;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72

72. Notes that both of the Relocation Decisions provide for operational support at the hotspots to be provided to Italy and Greece for the screening and fingerprinting of migrants when they first arrive, registration of their application for international protection, provision of information to applicants on relocation, organisation of return operations for those who did not apply for international protection and are not otherwise entitled to remain or those who applied unsuccessfully, and the facilitation of all steps involved in the relocation procedure itself;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74

74. Recognises that one of the main purposes of hotspots is to allow the Union to grant protection and humanitarian assistance in a swift manner to those in need; emphasises that great care needs to be taken to ensure that the categorising of migrants at hotspots is carried out in full respect for the fundamental rights of all migrants in cooperation with the relevant agencies and national Human Rights institutions; acknowledges, however, that proper identification of applicants for international protection at the point of first arrival in the Union should help facilitate the overall functioning of any reformed CEAS;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77

77. ~~Notes that~~Calls on the Commission ~~is considering a revision of~~to revise Council Directive 2002/90/EC defining the facilitation of unauthorised entry, transit and residence; takes the view that anyone who provides different forms of humanitarian assistance to those in need should not be criminalised and that Union law should reflect that principle; notes that some of the Facilitation directive´s provisions, including the definition of "facilitation of stay" creates divergences and grey areas which are deterring humanitarian actors from providing assistance;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 89

89. Reaffirms that the Union must adopt a long-term strategy to help counteract the ‘push factors’ in third countries (persecution, conflict, generalised violence or extreme poverty), which force people into the hands of criminal smuggling networks, which they see as their only chance to reach the Union; Underlines that this work should be done with the inclusion of NGOs and civil society organisations working in the field;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92

92. Understands that, in the long term, greater impetus is needed in solving the geo-political issues that affect the root causes of migration, as war, poverty, corruption, hunger and a lack of opportunities means that people will still feel forced to flee to Europe unless Europe looks at how to help re-build those countries; points out that this means that the Commission and the Member States must put up the money to help build capacity in third countries, such as by facilitating investment and education, strengthening and enforcing asylum systems, helping to manage borders better, and reinforcing legal and judicial systems there; calls therefore on Member States to achieve the level of 0.7% of GNI in development assistance as soon as possible;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94

94. ~~Welcom~~Notes the ~~recently established Emergency Trust Fund for Africa~~setting-up of the Union Regional Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian Crisis and of the E~~UR 1.8 billion pledged to the fund~~mergency Trust Fund for Africa, which has added an additional element to third- country funding; ~~calls on~~urges the Member States to ~~continue contributing to the fund~~stand by their promises and contribute to these funds; reminds that the above funds were created in response to the lack of flexibility and funding in the EU budget;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94 a (new)

94a. Calls on each Member State to take on its share in the package of the EUR 3 billion Refugee Facility for Turkey; raises however the question of how the Union contribution should be made available within the respective ceilings of the Union budget for 2016 and 2017;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 96

96. Notes that the Union’s migration policy is implemented through different policy instruments, each having its own objectives, which are not necessarily interlinked, and that there is insufficient coordination of funding between the multiple actors involved; points out that the fragmentation of budget lines and responsibilities creates a management structure that could make it difficult to provide a comprehensive overview on how the different funds available are allocated ~~and ultimately used~~; considers it essential to keep a close eye on the use made of all funding related to immigration, in particular with regard to contracting and subcontracting procedures, in view of a number of instances of fraud and mismanagement that have occurred in the Member States; points out, furthermore, that such fragmentation makes it harder to quantify how much the Union spends overall on migration policy;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97

97. Is of the opinion that such a comprehensive overview of Union funding related to migration, both within and outside the Union must be provided, as the absence of such an overview is a clear obstacle to transparency and sound policymaking; notes, in that regard, that one possible option could be a website or an annual report comprising a database of all Union funded projects related to migration policy; underlines that the need for transparency also extends to budget lines in order to ensure adequate funding for all objectives of Union migration policy;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 98

98. Welcomes the ~~additional funding made available in the Union’s budget for 2016 to start to deal with the current migration phenomena~~mobilisation of significant budgetary means spread over 2015 and 2016 to address the migration and refugee crisis; pPoints out that most of that new funding represents funding under the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework ('MFF~~), which has been brought forward, with the result that the Union is spending toda~~') and that the whole available envelop for the flexibility instrument in 2016 and the entirety of its 2014 and 2015 unused portions were mobilised for this purpose; highlights accordingly wthat ~~was intended to be spent tomorrow~~longer-term solutions should be sought, not only in the annual budgetary procedure, but also in the upcoming mid-term revision of the MFF;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 99 a (new)

99a. Calls on the Commission to provide as accurate an assessment as possible of the appropriations needed for the AMIF over the period to 2020 and, on that basis, to present a proposal for an increase in the heading 3 appropriations and, if necessary, an adjusted allocation among the various implementing programmes in the context of the revision of the multiannual financial framework, due by the end of 2016; stresses also the need for such funding to have genuine European added value rather than simply supporting existing national programmes;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102

102. Points out that securing operational funding is a key challenge for NGOs as most funding is project-related; affirms that volunteer and civil-society initiatives dedicated to providing assistance to migrants should be promoted and, where appropriate, funded by the Commission and the Member States; calls on the Member States and the Commission to seek, where appropriate and possible, to fund projects managed by civil society organisations working in the areas of migration, integration and asylum; draws in this respect the attention to the positive role that projects intended to increase the understanding of the public with regards to migratory flows and in particular the positive impact that migrants can have on the economy and their new environment;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111 a (new)

111a. Underlines that the policy of the European Union in the area of legal economic migration should in no case be based on a brain drain from developing countries; recalls that such a phenomena would deprive these countries of the talents which are necessary for their development; is of the opinion that migratory flows can play a positive role for development and that it is necessary to promote circular migration in order to allow these persons to also be actors for development within their countries of origin;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2095(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Angelika MLINAR, Gérard DEPREZ, Morten PETERSEN, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 113 a (new)

113a. Calls on the Commission, on the basis of an assessment report, to formulate recommendations to improve Eurosur;

2016/02/22
Committee: LIBE

2015/2086(INL)

Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Insists on the absolute necessity to ensure legal certainty in the field of inter- country adoption for the protection of the parents' and children's rights respecting and promoting at the same time EU law provisions as regards European Citizenship, free movement, the principles of mutual recognition and mutual trust, in full respect of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

2016/03/04
Committee: PETI

2015/2086(INL)

Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Draws the attention of the European Commission, the Council and the Member States on the possible harmful consequences of non-consensual adoptions for birth parents and the adopted children~~Recognises that while procedures dispending with parental consent for adoption are primarily means to protect children from situations of abandonment, abuse, mistreatment, loss of parental rights, etc, these also have severe consequences for birth parents and the adopted children, notably if appropriate social and family support is lacking and a policy pushing for adoptions is officially pursued;

2016/03/04
Committee: PETI

2015/2086(INL)

Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Member States, in case of adoption, to ensure that the relatives of the bi~~rth~~ological parents ~~have had a real opportunity to apply~~are considered as permanent caretaker of the child;

2016/03/04
Committee: PETI

2015/2053(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission to consider whether or not to perform this review in the framework of a broader review of the entire system of Geographical Indicators with a view to consolidate the many different existing instruments governing agricultural GI:s in one consolidated instrument covering also non-agricultural GI:s.

2015/05/28
Committee: JURI

2015/2053(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Proposes that the Commission examine the possibility of transferring, in this context, also the registration of agricultural GI:s to the OHIM

2015/05/28
Committee: JURI

2015/2041(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Recalls the importance of access to documents and calls for an ambitious reform of Regulation (EC) 1049/2001, regrets the present deadlock in Council on the revision;

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2041(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Believes that a proactive culture of transparency that promotes the rule of law presupposes clear and efficient mechanisms for managing conflicts of interest within EU institutions and advisory bodies; regrets, in this context, the absence of a common code of conduct for the European Council, which makes it difficult to assess whether integrity is safeguarded and potential misbehaviour sanctioned, and calls on the European Council to introduce comprehensive integrity rules for its President and his/her office, urges the Council to review its policy on access to documents and to align it with the relevant provision of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2041(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Recalls the European Parliament's request to the Commission to examine the possibility of establishing a European whistle-blower protection programme and welcomes the European Ombudsman's investigation into whether the EU institutions are living up to their obligation of introducing internal whistleblowing rules;

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2041(INI)

Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Recalls the need to improve the transparency of legislative negotiations; underlines the importance of publishing the progress of negotiations after each trilogue and to opt for a plenary mandate of the EP negotiating team in order to improve transparency as regards first reading agreements commonly conducted in trilogues,

2015/12/16
Committee: JURI

2015/2012(BUD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Monika HOHLMEIER, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Petr JEŽEK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Barbara MATERA, Barbara SPINELLI, Emilian PAVEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Notes that, to this end, the Secretary- General proposes the creation of 20 additional posts in order to reinforce the secretariats of the ~~four~~ parliamentary committees concerned (ECON, ENVI, ITRE ~~and~~, TRAN and LIBE); considers that this reinforcement can be accepted only after the examination of the possibilities of internal redeployment;

2015/03/20
Committee: BUDG

2015/0310(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a) Given the role of the European Border and Coast Guard for insuring high level internal security within the Union, while safeguarding the free movement of persons therein, and in line with the Treaties and their Protocols, Member States which are party to the Schengen Agreements but not yet part of the Schengen Area without internal controls, shall participate and benefit on equal footing in the European Border and Coast Guard, its actions, bodies and financial allocations.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)

(13a) The vulnerability assessment shall also assess how Member States respect fundamental rights, including appropriate and adequate reception conditions for the migrants, refugees and asylum seekers arriving at the border, the presence and effectiveness of instruments that ensure access to information for migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees, the possibility to apply for international protection, the access to legal assistance, the identification and referral of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants to relevant procedures, the access to effective remedies. Such assessment shall be made in cooperation with the Consultative Forum, the Fundamental Rights Centre, the Fundamental Rights Agency and EASO.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) In cases where a Member State does not take the necessary corrective action in line with the vulnerability assessment or in the event of disproportionate migratory pressure at the external borders, rendering the control at the external border ineffective to an extent which risks putting in jeopardy the functioning of the Schengen area, a unified, rapid and effective response should be delivered at Union level. For this purpose, and to ensure better coordination at Union level, the Commission should identify the measures to be implemented by the European Border and Coast Guard Agency and require the Member State concerned to cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of those measures. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency should then determine the actions to be taken for the practical execution of the measures indicated in the Commission decision, and an operational plan should be drawn up ~~with the Member State concerned~~.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)

(17a) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency should carry out and assist Member States in search and rescue operations for persons in distress at sea and should fulfil this task in full compliance with fundamental rights, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and obligations related to access to international protection, in particular the principle of non-refoulement, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, and the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) On 8 October 2015, the European Council called for enlarging the mandate of the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union to assist Member States in ensuring the effective return of illegally staying third-country nationals, including by organising return operations on its own initiative and enhancing its role regarding the acquisition of travel documents and, where appropriate, the issuing of European travel documents for the return journey. For this purpose, the European Council called for the establishment of a Return Office within the European Border and Coast Guard Agency which should be tasked with the coordination of the Agency’s activities in the field of return.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30

(30) This Regulation establishes a complaint mechanism for the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, in cooperation with the Fundamental Rights Officer, to monitor and ensure the respect for fundamental rights in all the activities of the Agency. This should be an administrative mechanism whereby the Fundamental Rights Officer should be responsible for handling complaints received by the Agency in accordance with the right to good administration. The Fundamental Rights Officer should review the admissibility of a complaint, register admissible complaints, forward all registered complaints to the Executive Director, forward complaints concerning border guards to the home Member State and register the follow-up by the Agency or that Member State. Criminal investigations should be conducted by the Member States.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49 a (new)

(49a) As regards the Member States which are party to the Schengen Agreements but not yet part of the Schengen Area without internal controls, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis and is hence fully applicable.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall ensure a constant and uniform application of EU law, including the EU acquis in fundamental rights, across all EU external borders.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) border management that acknowledges the different needs of mixed migration flows at the external borders;

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)

(ab) search and rescue of persons in distress at sea;

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The implementation of European integrated border management shall be in full compliance with fundamental rights.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) establish a ~~monitoring and r~~Risk Analysisk an~~alysis c~~d Vulnerability Assessment Centre with the capacity to monitor migratory flows and to carry out risk analysis as regards all aspects of integrated border management; and the capacity to carry out vulnerability assessments including the assessment of the capacity of Member States to face threats and pressures at the external borders.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point b

~~(b) carry out a vulnerability assessment including the assessment of the capacity of Member States to face threats and pressures at the external borders;~~deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) assist Member States in circumstances requiring increased technical and operational assistance at the external borders by coordinating and organising joint operations~~, taking into account that some situations may involve humanitarian emergencies and rescue at sea~~;

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(ca) carry out and assist Member States in humanitarian emergency operations and in search and rescue operations of persons in distress at sea;

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) assist Member States in circumstances requiring increased technical and operational assistance at the external borders, by launching rapid border interventions at the external borders of those Member States facing specific and disproportionate pressures~~, taking into account that some situations may involve humanitarian emergencies and rescue at sea~~;

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Member States must provide the Agency with information on the budget and financial resources dedicated to border management at a national level.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – title

~~Monitoring of migratory flows and risk analysis~~Risk Analysis and Vulnerability Assessment Centre

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1

1. The Agency shall establish a ~~monitoring and r~~Risk Analysisk an~~alysis c~~d Vulnerability Assessment Centre with the capacity to monitor migratory flows towards and within the Union~~. For this purpose, the Agency shall develop a common integrated risk analysis model, which shall be applied by the Agency and the Member States~~ and to carry out vulnerability assessments as referred Article 12.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. When developing a common integrated risk analysis model, the Agency shall draw on Europol cross-border crime risk analyses.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2

2. The ~~Agency~~Risk Analysis and Vulnerability Assessment Centre shall prepare general and tailored risk analyses and submit it to the Council and the Commission. For this purpose, it shall develop a common integrated risk analysis model, which shall be applied by the Agency and the Member States.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3

3. The risk analysis prepared by the ~~Agency~~Centre shall cover all aspects relevant to the European integrated border management, in particular border control, return, irregular secondary movements of third-country nationals within the Union, the prevention of cross-border crime including facilitation of irregular immigration, trafficking in human being and terrorism, as well as the situation in neighbouring third countries with a view to developing a pre-warning mechanism which analyses the migratory flows towards the Union, as well as the respect of fundamental rights.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. Member States shall provide the ~~Agency~~Centre with all necessary information regarding the situation, trends and possible threats at the external borders and in the field of return. Member States shall regularly or upon the request of the ~~Agency~~Centre provide it with all relevant information such as statistical and operational data collected in relation to the implementation of the Schengen acquis as well as information and intelligence derived from the analysis layer of the national situational picture established in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Petr JEŽEK, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4

4. Member States shall provide the Agency with all necessary information regarding the situation, trends and possible cross-border crime threats at the external borders and in the field of return. Member States shall regularly or upon the request of the Agency provide it with all relevant information such as statistical and operational data collected in relation to the implementation of the Schengen acquis as well as information and intelligence derived from the analysis layer of the national situational picture established in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1

1. The ~~Agency~~Risk Analysis and Vulnerability Assessment Centre shall assess the technical equipment, systems, capabilities, resources and contingency plans of the Member States regarding border control. That assessment shall be based on information provided by the Member State and by the liaison officer, on information derived from Eurosur, in particular the impact levels attributed to the external land and sea border sections of each Member State in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013, and on the reports and evaluations of joint operations, pilot projects, rapid border interventions and other activities of the Agency.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2

2. Member States shall, at the request of the ~~Agency~~Centre, provide information as regards technical equipment, staff and financial resources available at national level to carry out border control and they shall submit their contingency plans.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3

3. The aim of the vulnerability assessment is for the ~~Agency~~Centre to assess the capacity and readiness of Member States to face upcoming challenges, including present and future threats and pressures at the external borders, to identify, especially for those Member States facing specific and disproportionate pressures, possible immediate consequences at the external borders and subsequent consequences on the functioning of the Schengen area, and to assess their capacity to contribute to the rapid reserve pool referred to in Article 19(5). The assessment also aims at evaluating the capacity of Member States to respect fundamental rights in such situations. That assessment is without prejudice to the Schengen evaluation mechanism.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4

4. The results of the vulnerability assessment shall be submitted to the ~~Super~~Advisory Board and the Management Board, which shall advise the Executive Director on the measures to be taken by the Member States based on the results of the vulnerability assessment, and taking into account the ~~Agency~~Centre’s risk analysis and the results of the Schengen evaluation mechanism.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5

5. The Executive Director, in close coordination with the Advisory Board and the Management Board, shall adopt a decision setting out the necessary corrective measures to be taken by the Member State concerned, including by using resources under the Union financial instruments. The decision of the Executive Director shall be binding on the Member State and shall lay down the time-limit within which the measures are to be taken. The Executive Director notifies the Commission and the European Parliament. If the Member State does not take the measures within the time-limit foreseen in that decision, further action may be taken by the Commission in accordance with Article 18.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6

6. Where a Member State does not adopt the necessary corrective measures within the time-limit set, the Executive Director shall refer the matter to the Management Board and notify the Commission. The Management Board shall adopt a decision setting out the necessary corrective measures to be taken by the Member State concerned, including the time-limit within which such measures shall be taken. If the Member State does not take the measures within the time- limit foreseen in that decision, further action may be taken by the Commission in accordance with Article 18.deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)

(da) deploy and coordinate joint search and rescue operations for people in distress at sea;

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Where a Member State does not take the necessary corrective measures in accordance with a decision of the ~~Management Board~~Executive Director referred to in Article 12(65) or in the event of disproportionate migratory pressure at the external border, rendering the control of the external borders ineffective to such an extent that it risks putting in jeopardy the functioning of the Schengen area, the Commission, after consulting the Agency, ~~may adopt a decision by means of an implementing act,~~shall immediately recommend to the Council to adopt, by simple majority, a decision establishing that no effective action has been taken and identifying the measures to be implemented by the Agency and requiring the Member State concerned to cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of those measures. Th~~ose implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 79(2)~~e Commission shall notify the European Parliament.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. In the event that the Council does not adopt the decision on the Commission recommendation and that failure to take appropriate action on the part of the Member State concerned persists or that disproportionate migratory pressure at the external border putting in jeopardy the functioning of the Schengen area persists, the Commission, after 1 month from its earlier recommendation, shall recommend to the Council to adopt the decision establishing that no effective action has been taken and identifying the measures to be implemented by the Agency and requiring the Member State concerned to cooperate with the Agency in the implementation of those measures. The decision shall be deemed to be adopted by the Council unless it decides, by qualified majority, to reject the recommendation within 10 days of its adoption by the Commission. The Member State concerned may ask for a Council meeting, within this deadline. The Commission shall notify the European Parliament.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4

4. In parallel and within the same two working days, the Executive Director shall ~~submi~~present a draft operational plan to the Member State concerned. ~~The Executive Director and the Member State concerned shall draw up the operational plan within two working days from the date of its submission.~~

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 6

6. The Member State concerned shall comply with the Co~~mmission~~uncil decision and for that purpose it shall immediately cooperate with the Agency and take the necessary action to facilitate the implementation of that decision and the practical execution of the measures set out in that decision and in the operational plan ~~agreed upon with the Executive Director~~.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. The Commission shall monitor the proper implementation of the measures identified in the Council decision and the actions taken, for that purpose, by the Agency in order to ensure a proper European border management.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3

3. The Executive Director, in close cooperation with the Consultative Forum and the Fundamental Rights Office, shall withdraw the financing of a joint operation or a rapid border intervention, or suspend or terminate, in whole or in part, a joint operation or rapid border intervention if he or she considers that there are violations of fundamental rights or international protection obligations that are of a serious nature or are likely to persist. Such decision shall be taken on the ground of objective and public criteria and shall be linked with the fundamental rights elements of the risks analysis and of the vulnerability assessments and with the results of the complaint mechanism.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 2 – point b

~~(b) information on third countries of return;~~deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. The Agency must not coordinate, organise or propose return operations or return interventions to any third country where risks of fundamental rights violations or serious deficiencies have been identified though risk analysis or reports from EU institutions, EEAS or EU Agencies.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2

2. The Executive Director shall determine the profile and the number of the forced return monitors to be made available to that pool. The same procedure shall apply with regard to any subsequent changes in the profile and the number. Member States shall contribute to the pool by nominating the forced return monitors corresponding to the defined profile. A child protection profile must be included in the pool for any return operation or intervention involving children.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2

2. The Executive Director shall determine the profile and the number of the forced return escorts to be made available to that pool. The same procedure shall apply with regard to any subsequent changes in the profile and the number. Member States shall contribute to the pool by nominating the forced return escorts corresponding to the defined profile. A child protection profile must be included in the pool for any return operation or intervention involving children

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)

Article 32 a Evaluation of return operations and return interventions The Executive Director shall evaluate the conduct and the results of the return operations and returns interventions and transmit the detailed evaluation reports within 60 days following the end of those operations and interventions to the Management Board, together with the observations of the Fundamental Rights Office. The Agency shall make a comprehensive comparative analysis of those results with a view to enhancing the quality, coherence and effectiveness of future operations and interventions, and it shall include it in its consolidated annual activity report.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1

1. The European Border and Coast Guard shall guarantee the protection of fundamental rights in the performance of its tasks under this Regulation in accordance with relevant Union law, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European Convention on Human Rights, relevant international law, including the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and obligations related to access to international protection, in particular the principle of non-refoulement. ~~For that purpose, the Agency shall draw up and further develop and implement a Fundamental Rights Strategy.~~

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The Agency shall draw up and further develop and implement a Fundamental Rights Strategy. The Agency, in close cooperation with the Consultative Forum and the Fundamental Rights Office, shall put in place an effective mechanism to monitor the respect for fundamental rights in all the activities of the Agency.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3

3. The European Border and Coast Guard shall, in the performance of its tasks, take into account the special needs of children, unaccompanied minors, victims of trafficking in human beings, persons in need of medical assistance, persons in need of international protection, persons in distress at sea and other persons in a particularly vulnerable situation.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) a ~~Super~~n Advisory Board;

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) a Fundamental Rights Officer.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1 – point a

~~(a) appoint the Executive Director on a proposal from the Commission in accordance with Article 68;~~deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1 – point c

~~(c) adopt decisions setting out corrective measures in accordance with Article 12(6);~~deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a regulation
Article 62 – paragraph 1

1. Without prejudice to paragraph 3, the Management Board shall be composed of one representative of each Member State ~~and~~, two representatives of the Commission and one representative of the European Parliament, all with voting rights. To this effect, each Member State shall appoint a member of the Management Board as well as an alternate who will represent the member in his or her absence. The Commission shall appoint two members and their alternates. The European Parliament shall appoint one member and his or her alternate. The duration of the terms of office shall be four years. The terms of office shall be extendable.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. The Executive Director shall hold regular exchanges of views with the appropriate bodies of the European Parliament, notably regarding specific cooperation with third countries, and shall present the annual report of the Agency.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 a (new)

Article 67a Independence 1. The Executive Director shall act in complete independence in the performance of his or her duties. 2. The Executive Director shall, in the performance of his or her duties, neither seek nor take instructions from anybody. 3. The Executive Director shall refrain from any action incompatible with his or her duties and shall not, during his or her term of office, engage in any other occupation, whether gainful or not. 4. The Executive Director shall, after his or her term of office, behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance of appointments and benefits.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 1

1. The ~~Commission shall propose candidates for the post of~~European Parliament and the Council shall appoint by common accord the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director based on a list drawn up by the Commission following publication of the post in the Official Journal of the European Union and other press or internet sites as appropriate.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The Executive Director shall be ~~appointed by the Management Board~~chosen on the grounds of merit, independence and documented high-level administrative and management skills, as well as senior professional experience in the field of management of the external borders and return. ~~The Management Board shall take its decision by a two- thirds majority of all members with a right to vote.~~

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

~~Power to dismiss the Executive Director shall lie with the Management Board, acting on a proposal from the Commission, according to the same procedure.~~deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

The Deputy Executive Director shall be ~~appointed by the Management Board~~chosen on the grounds of merit and documented appropriate administrative and management skills, as well as relevant professional experience in the field of management of the external borders and return ~~on the proposal of the Commission, after having consulted the Executive Director. The Management Board shall take its decision by a two-thirds majority of all members with a right to vote~~.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

~~Power to dismiss the Deputy Executive Director shall be with the Management Board, according to the same procedure.~~deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 6

6. The Management Board, acting on a proposal from the Commission that takes into account the assessment referred to in paragraph 5, may extend the term of office of the Executive Director once, for no more than five years.deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 7

~~7. The term of the office of the Deputy Executive Director shall be five years. It may be extended by the Management Board once for another period of up to five years.~~deleted

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. The Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director shall be eligible for reappointment.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Apart from normal replacement or death, the duties of the Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director shall end in the event of resignation. The Executive Director and the Deputy Executive Director may be dismissed by the Court of Justice at the request of the European Parliament, the Council or the Commission, if he or she no longer fulfils the conditions required for the performance of his or her duties or if he or she is guilty of serious misconduct.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – title

~~Super~~Advisory Board

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The ~~Super~~Advisory Board shall advise the Executive Director:

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 2

2. The ~~Super~~Advisory Board shall be composed of the Deputy Executive Director, four other senior officials of the Agency to be appointed by the Management Board ~~and~~, one of the representatives of the Commission to the Management Board~~. The Super~~, the representative of the European Parliament to the Management Board, one representative from EASO and one representative from the fundamental rights Office. The Advisory Board shall be chaired by the Deputy Executive Director.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2

2. The Agency shall invite the European Asylum Support Office, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and other relevant organisations to participate in the Consultative Forum. On a proposal by the Executive Director, the Management Board shall decide on the composition ~~and the working methods~~ of the Consultative Forum ~~and the modalities of the transmission of information to the Consultative Forum~~. The Consultative Forum shall decide on its own working methods.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 5

5. The Consultative Forum shall have an effective access to all information concerning the respect for fundamental rights, including by carrying out on spot visits to joint operations or rapid border interventions subject to the agreement of the host Member State.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – title

Fundamental Rights Officer

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1

1. A Fundamental Rights Officer shall be des~~ignated by the Management Board and shall have the necessary qualifications and experience in the field~~tablished within the Agency, with the capacity to monitor the respect of fundamental rights by the Agency.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The Fundamental Rights Office shall be composed of Fundamental Rights Officers that have the necessary qualifications and experience in the field of fundamental rights.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. The Fundamental Rights Office shall have adequate resources and staff at its disposal, corresponding to the mandate and the size of the Agency.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 2

2. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall be independent in the performance of his or her duties as a Fundamental Rights Officer, he or she shall report directly to the Management Board and ~~cooperate with~~to the Consultative Forum. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall report on a regular basis and as such contribute to the mechanism for monitoring fundamental rights.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The Fundamental Rights Office is fully represented in the Advisory Board

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 71 – paragraph 3

3. The Fundamental Rights Officer shall be consulted on the operational plans drawn up in accordance with Articles 15, 16 and 32(4) and shall have access to all information concerning respect for fundamental rights, in relation to all the activities of the Agency.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

2015/0310(COD)

Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Morten PETERSEN, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 72 – paragraph 6

6. In case of a registered complaint concerning a border guard of a host Member State or a member of the teams, including seconded members of the teams or seconded national experts, the home Member State shall ensure appropriate follow-up, including disciplinary measures as necessary or other measures in accordance with national law. The relevant Member State shall report back to the Fundamental Rights Officer, within a limited period of time, as to the findings and follow-up to a complaint. If the Member State concerned do not provide such a follow-up, the Agency shall send an official letter informing the Member State about the complaint and determining possible follow-up actions to the Member State.

2016/04/21
Committee: LIBE

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Dita CHARANZOVÁ, Petr JEŽEK

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point ii

~~(ii) in category B, point 7 is~~ deleted.

2016/04/06
Committee: LIBE

2015/0269(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii

Directive 91/477/EEC
Annex I – part II – point A – Category C – point 5

5. Alarm and signal weapons, salute and acoustic weapons ~~as well as replicas~~;

2016/04/06
Committee: LIBE

2015/0269(COD)

Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Proposal for a decision
Citation 3 a (new)

– having regard to the Charter of Fundamental rights, in particular Chapter I and Articles 18 and 19,

2015/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2015/0125(NLE)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

1a. Member States should provide EASO with a list of profession available identifying and matching both Member States and applicants needs in the labour market.

2015/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2015/0125(NLE)

Gérard DEPREZ, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Angelika MLINAR, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a decision
Article 11 a (new)

Article 11a By July 2016 the Commission, with the support of the European Agency for Fundamental Rights, shall present an impact assessment on the respect of the Fundamental Rights at the borders, in particular during the finger printing process.

2015/07/14
Committee: LIBE

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. Whereas the current highly fragmented system of national private copy levies constitutes a deeply unfair, flawed and outdated system for compensating right holders for what amounts to an ordinary and perfectly harmless use by consumers of legally acquired content and whereas there are no objective and fair methods to redistribute the so called compensation from this use as there is no way to establish which legally acquired works citizens are copying in the privacy of their own homes;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. Whereas the fragmented system of private copy levies causes disproportional bureaucratic burdens and major problems for the proper functioning of the European internal market for all goods covered by the unjust and outdated levy system which is detrimental to growth and economic development in Europe; whereas the European digital single market will therefore not become a reality until private copy levies have been phased out;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Considers the introduction of a single European Copyright Title on the basis of Article 118 TFEU that would apply directly and uniformly across the EU, in accordance with the Commission’s objective of better regulation, as a ~~leg~~potential means to remedy the lack of harmonisation resulting from Directive 2001/29/EC, which merits to be properly assessed by the commission in its review of Directive 2001/29/EC;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that a large part of the fragmentation of the digital single market for cultural content needs to be tackled with further legislative measures, also besides the review of the Directive 2001/29/EC, targeted at the lack of harmonised approach notably with regards to the licensing of cultural content and in this context welcomes the progress which was achieved through the adoption of the Collective Rights Management Directive as an important first step;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to ~~harmonise the term of protection of copyright to a duration that does not exceed the current international standards set out in the Berne Convention~~explore the possibility to significantly shorten the duration of the harmonised terms of protections of copyright within the framework of a modern trade policy agenda;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to ~~make~~propose a list of mandatory ~~all the~~ exceptions and limitations ~~referred to in~~in its review of Directive 2001/29/EC, toas this would allow equal access to cultural diversity across borders within the internal market and to improve legal certainty;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses that the ability to freely link from one resource to another is one of the fundamental building blocks of the free and open internet; calls on the EU legislator to ~~make it~~further clearify that reference to works by means of a hyperlink is not subject to exclusive rights, as it does not consist in a communication to a new public12 ; __________________ 12 Order of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2014 in Case C-348/13, BestWater International GmbH v Michael Mebes and Stefan Potsch (request for a preliminary ruling from Germany’s Bundesgerichtshof).

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the ~~EU legislator to ensure~~Commission to propose in the review of Directive 2001/29/EC that the use of photographs, video footage or other images of works which are permanently located in public places ishall be permitted;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls for a broad exception for research and education purposes, which should cover not only educational establishments but any kind of educational or research activity, including non-formal education;deleted

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

~~20. Calls for the adoption of a mandatory exception allowing libraries to lend books to the public in digital formats, irrespective of the place of access;~~deleted

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the EU legislator to protect consumers by precludeing Member States from introducing statutory licences for the compensation of rightholders for the harm caused by acts made permissible by an exception;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls for the adoption of harmonised criteria for defining the harm caused to rightholders in respect of reproductions made by a natural person for private use, and for harmonised transparency measures as regards the private copying levies put in place in some Member States13 ; __________________ 13As stated in António Vitorino’s recommendations of 31 January 2013 resulting from the latest mediation process conducted by the Commission in respect of private copying and reprography levies.Underlines that citizens in all Member States should have a legal right to make private copies for their own use of legally acquired content without having to pay extra compensation to right holders through cumbersome and illogical levies on technical devices; thus urges the commission to propose a fully harmonised private copy exception which would not cause harm to right holders and which would thus not need to be compensated through a levy system;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2256(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Frédérique RIES, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Stresses that the effective exercise of exceptions or limitations, and access to content that is not subject to copyright or related rights protection, should not be hindered by technological measures and that member states should have sufficient enforcement measures in place to deter any such actions;

2015/03/05
Committee: JURI

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – introductory part

4. Urges the Commission to ensure that any such internal strategy is accompanied by a~~n action plan,~~ series of legislative proposals, in the context of the Treaties currently in for~~der to supplement and strengthen the~~ce, with a view to adopting a European Democratic Governance Pact in an effort to: (a) establish a scoreboard for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights so that each Member Strate~~gic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy already applied in EU external relations; notes that the strategy should:~~ is assessed periodically. – With that aim in view, the Commission should set up a group of experts with a remit to establish the indicators by which democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights will be measured. These indicators should reflect the Copenhagen political criteria governing accession and the values and rights laid down in Article 2 of the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. – The indicators should be drawn up on the basis of existing standards, such as those developed by the UN and the Council of Europe, and the contributions of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, existing international bodies and civil society organisations operating in the area of human rights and fundamental freedoms should be taken into account.

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. b) expand the remit and structure of the Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). The founding regulation of the FRA should be amended to expand the Agency’s remit and power so that it can monitor the common indicators concerning the rule of law and fundamental rights and the additional human and financial resources it needs to carry out its new tasks, and do all this without detracting from its independence and impartiality, which are two of the Agency’s fundamental principles. – A rule of law and fundamental rights evaluation committee should be set up within the Agency (FRA Evaluation Committee) to analyse and evaluate the results of the regular monitoring of the indicators. – The FRA Evaluation Committee should publish an annual monitoring report containing a detailed evaluation of each Member State’s performance on the basis of the various indicators. – The Evaluation Committee could then recommend, on the basis of this annual report, that the Commission issue a formal warning if one or more indicators show that a Member State, or even several Member States, are violating the rule of law or fundamental rights.

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. c) establish a European Semester for democratic governance, the rule of law and fundamental rights: a binding EU mechanism; – Following publication of the scoreboard and the FRA Evaluation Committee’s annual report, the Commission, acting on its own initiative or on a recommendation from the FRA Evaluation Committee, may issue a formal warning to a Member State which has committed one or more violations of the rule of law or fundamental rights (in the light of the evaluation carried out on the basis of the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Scoreboard); – A Member State which has been issued with a formal warning should have the opportunity, by a set deadline, to submit its observations on the concerns raised by the Commission; – After issuing its formal warning the Commission should carry out an in-depth analysis on the basis of the indicators, emphasising its concerns and taking account of any observations submitted by the Member state concerned; – In the context of a dialogue on the rule of law and fundamental rights, the Parliament’s committee responsible should invite the ministers of the Member State which has received a formal warning and the Commissioner responsible for an exchange of views on the concerns raised by the Commission and any observations submitted by the Member State. The Commission’s formal warning should also be specifically taken into account in Parliament’s annual report on the situation of fundamental rights in the EU. – The national parliament of the Member State which has received a formal warning may invite the Commission to a debate on the concerns it has raised and the specific indicators which have revealed a violation of the rule of law or fundamental rights. A formal warning issued by the Commission to a Member State should also be automatically included on the agenda for the next Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting, so that the Member States can exchange views and a possible Council conclusion can be drafted; – After concluding the in-depth evaluation which follows the issuing of a formal warning to a Member State, the Commission should decide – by a set deadline – if the concerns it raised have been properly addressed by the Member State concerned by making observations or taking corrective measures at national level; – If the Commission concludes that the concerns raised in its formal warning have not been addressed by the Member State concerned, it should issue a formal recommendation on the rule of law and fundamental rights in which it outlines corrective measures which must be taken by the Member State by a set deadline; – The formal recommendation issued by the Commission should be included on the agenda for the next part-session and the next Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting - and may be challenged by a qualified majority vote (reverse qualified majority). Any challenge to a formal recommendation shall be without prejudice to the activation of the mechanism provided for in Article 7 TEU; – If the Member State concerned has not taken corrective measures the Commission should launch infringement proceedings (if applicable) or activate the mechanism provided for in Article 7 TEU.

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Calls on EU Institutions to consider EU Treaty change in order to allow for the Democratic Governance Pact (DGP) to be fully functioning, in particular by; (a) Expanding the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union by creating a new specific procedure to enforce the rule of law principle of Article 2 TEU in a Member State by means of an infringement procedure brought by the Commission or another Member State before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU); (b) Revising Article 7 of the EU Treaty, adding an 'application of Article 2 of the EU Treaty' stage, separating the 'risk' stage from the 'violation' stage, with different thresholds for the majorities provided for, a strengthening of technical and objective (not only political) analysis, enhanced dialogue with the Member States' institutions and a wider range of detailed and predictable penalties which are applicable throughout the procedure (Michel, 2013); (c) Including a reference to the FRA in the Treaties, including a legal base making it possible to amend the Agency's founding regulation not by unanimity, as is currently the case, but via the ordinary legislative procedure; (d) Creating a possibility for national Parliament to refer a draft national law to the CJEU for an opinion on its compliance with the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4d. Calls for the setting-up – if possible by means of an interinstitutional agreement – of a ‘Copenhagen Committee’ made up of independent experts in the field of fundamental rights, some of whom should be appointed by Parliament, whose task would be to ensure that all the Member States uphold the common values laid down in Article 2 TEU and observe the ‘Copenhagen criteria’ at all times, and to issue recommendations and draw up reports on issues relating to fundamental rights until such time as the FRA regulation is modified, when the Agency should have greater powers to monitor each Member State’s performance in the area of fundamental rights, as Parliament has repeatedly urged.

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 i (new)

13i. Reminds the Member States of their obligations towards refugees, particularly under the Geneva Convention and the non-refoulement principle;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 f (new)

13f. Urges the EU to extend the mandate of Frontex so as to authorise it to carry out sea rescue operations;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 d (new)

13d. Welcomes the establishment by the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, of the Task-Force for the Mediterranean following the Lampedusa tragedy of 3 October 2013, but thinks that more ought to be done particularly in terms of legal access routes to the European Union for people in need of protection; to that end, encourages the Commission and the Member States to make progress on the matter of humanitarian visas;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 h (new)

13h. Stresses that building walls or barriers at borders cannot be an answer to migratory pressure, and is concerned that people in need of protection may be unable to find refuge as a result of these walls and barriers;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 j (new)

13j. Notes that collective expulsions are prohibited under Article 19 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 3 a (new)

- establish a new centralised EU asylum system that would allocate refugees between member states, based on a quota system taking both quantitative (GDP and population of the member state) and qualitative (language, cultural ties, family ties of the refugee) data into account;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 – indent 3 b (new)

- mandatory participation by all Member States in resettlement programmes;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2254(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Calls on the Member States to take into account the specific needs of certain categories of particularly vulnerable migrants, such as women, children, LGBTI people, disabled people and elderly people;

2015/05/19
Committee: LIBE

2014/2253(INI)

Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Gérard DEPREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that EU Member States have an obligation to make use of the existing provisions on humanitarian visa in the Visa Code which constitutes an alternative to irregular entry routes by providing for the safe and legal entry of third-country nationals;

2015/05/28
Committee: LIBE

2014/2228(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point i a (new)

ia. Considers it to be of great importance that the EU and the US remain committed and engaged in global multilateral patent harmonisation discussions through existing international bodies and thus cautions against attempting to introduce provisions on substantive patent law, in particular with regards to issues related to patentability and grace periods, into TTIP;

2015/03/27
Committee: JURI

2014/2218(INI)

Javier NART, Fernando MAURA BARANDIARÁN, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Juan Carlos GIRAUTA VIDAL, Ivo VAJGL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Jozo RADOŠ, Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Points to the ~~work~~important work carried out by the Committee on Petitions in ~~connection with petitions on issues relating to disability and notes the Committee’s willingness to continue to supp~~the context of the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; takes due note of the Concluding observations on the initial report of the European Union; highlights that the European Union Framework should be adequately resourced, in line with the requirements of the Convention; in this respect, calls for an enhancement of the capacity of the Committee on Petitions and its secretariat, enabling the Committee to properly fulfil its protection role; calls for the establishment of a designated officer with responsibility fort th~~is work in association with the parliamentary committees with responsibility in this field~~e processing of disabilities-related issues; emphasizes the Committee's willingness to work closely with legislative parliamentary committees involved in the European Parliament Network on Disabilities;

2015/11/09
Committee: PETI

2014/2218(INI)

Heinz K. BECKER, Peter JAHR, Rosa ESTARÀS FERRAGUT, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Pál CSÁKY, Julia PITERA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses the wide range of the subjects raised in the petitions filed by citizens, such as fundamental rights, the internal market, environmental law, public health issues, child welfare, transport, the disabled and animal rights; calls for further specialising the work of the Committee on Petitions by nominating internal rapporteurs on the major policies to which petitioners refer;

2015/11/09
Committee: PETI

2014/2075(DEC)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 166

166. Is surprised by the fact that OLAF has not recommended that the Commission establish a recovery order on the basis of the financial damage caused to the Union budget with regard the humanitarian support granted to the refugee camp of Tindouf whilst it has estimated in its report (OF 2003/0526) that the number of refugees was considerably lower than indicated by the Sahrawi or Algerian authorities;deleted

2015/03/09
Committee: CONT

2014/2075(DEC)

Javier NART, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Fernando MAURA BARANDIARÁN, Juan Carlos GIRAUTA VIDAL, Ivo VAJGL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Jozo RADOŠ, Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 166 a (new)

166a. Takes note that OLAF carried out a report on the humanitarian aid granted to the Saharawi refugee camp of Tindouf in Algeria (dated 2007). Calls for clarification by the Commission on the measures taken in response to the findings of this report. Reminds the Commission of the importance to adapt Union aid to the actual needs of the population concerned;

2015/03/09
Committee: CONT

2014/2075(DEC)

Javier NART, Fernando MAURA BARANDIARÁN, Izaskun BILBAO BARANDICA, Juan Carlos GIRAUTA VIDAL, Ivo VAJGL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Jozo RADOŠ, Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167

~~167. Urges the Commission to adapt Union aid to the actual needs of the population concerned in order to put an end to all kinds of trafficking and to the embezzlement of humanitarian assistance;~~deleted

2015/03/09
Committee: CONT

2014/2040(BUD)

Petr JEŽEK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Doubt~~Stresses that the ~~increased budget of the EASO will be~~foreseen increase of the EASO budget is not sufficient, as this Agency is crucial to address pressing asylum issues and will have a reinforced role in promoting the uniform application of the Asylum package; therefore requests an appropriate budget increase in order to allow the Agency to effectively fulfil its tasks and operations;

2014/08/28
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. A European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) is hereby established in order to foster a coherent European law enforcement training policy and to strengthen the fundamental rights dimension of European law enforcement training.

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point a

(a) ‘Law enforcement ~~officers’~~professionals or aspiring professionals' means officers of police, customs and of other relevant services, ~~including Union bodies,~~ responsible for preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime that affect a common interest covered by a Union policy ~~and for~~, public order, crisis management and international policing of major events., including employees or experts of Union institutions, bodies, offices and departments whose competences are related to those tasks;

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii a (new)

(iiia) fundamental rights aspects of law enforcement cooperation, including privacy, data protection and the rights, support and protection of victims; including safeguarding the rights of victims of gender based violence (GBV);

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) common curricula to raise awareness and knowledge, address gaps and/or facilitate a common approach in relation to cross-border criminal phenomena, in particular with regard to terrorism, cybercrime, financial investigation, and participation in Union missions;

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. CEPOL shall contribute to the development of research relevant for training activities covered by this Regulation particularly with regard to fundamental rights, the fight against serious crime and more general cross border criminal matters in training activities.

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3

3. The provisional seat of CEPOL shall be in Budapest, Hungary.

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. The Commission shall present, no later than two years after the date of application of this Regulation, a cost- benefit analysis and an impact assessment on the provisional seat as compared to The Hague as an alternative scenario and, if appropriate, a legislative proposal to amend paragraph 3 accordingly.

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0217(COD)

Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1

1. No later than 53 years after the date ~~referred to in Article 43~~of application of this Regulation and every 5 years thereafter, the Commission shall commission an evaluation to assess particularly the impact, effectiveness and efficiency of CEPOL and its working practices. The evaluation shall, in particular, address the possible need to modify the mandate of CEPOL, and the financial implications of any such modification.

2015/01/13
Committee: LIBE

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2

(2) The financial crisis has revealed that shareholders in many cases supported managers' excessive short-term risk taking. Moreover, there is clear evidence that the current level of ‘monitoring’ of investee companies and engagement by institutional investors and asset managers is inadequate, which may lead to suboptimal corporate governance and performance of listed companies.

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) In view of the important role of intermediaries they should be obliged to facilitate the exercise of rights by the shareholder both when they would like to exercise these rights hithemselfves or wants to nominate a third person to do so. When ~~the~~ shareholders does not want to exercise the rights hithemselfves and hasve nominated the intermediary as a third person, the latter should be obliged to exercise these rights upon the explicit authorisation and instruction of the shareholders and for ~~his~~their benefit.

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nils TORVALDS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) Institutional investors and asset managers are important shareholders of listed companies in the Union and therefore can play an important role in the corporate governance of these companies, but also more generally with regard to the strategy and long-term performance of these companies. However, the experience of the last years has shown that institutional investors and asset managers often do not engage with companies in which they hold shares and evidence shows that capital markets exert pressure on companies to perform in the short term, which may lead to a suboptimal level of investments, for example in research and development to the detriment to long-term performance of both the companies and the investor.

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) In order to improve the information in the equity investment chain Member States should ensure that proxy advisors adopt and implement adequate measures to ~~guarantee~~ensure to the best of their ability that their voting recommendations are accurate and reliable, based on a thorough analysis of all the information that is available to them and are not affected by any existing or potential conflict of interest or business relationship. They should disclose certain key information related to the preparation of their voting recommendations and any actual or potential conflict of interest or business relationships that may influence the preparation of the voting recommendations.

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nils TORVALDS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 15

(15) Since remuneration is one of the key instruments for companies to align their interests and those of their directors and in view of the crucial role of directors in companies, it is important that the remuneration policy of companies is determined in an appropriate manner. Without prejudice to the provisions on remuneration of Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council17 listed companies and their shareholders should have the possibility to define the remuneration policy of the directors of their company. __________________ 17Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338..deleted

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nils TORVALDS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 16

(16) In order to ensure that shareholders have an effective say on the remuneration policy, they should be granted the right to approve the remuneration policy, on the basis of a clear, understandable and comprehensive overview of the company's remuneration policy, which should be aligned with the business strategy, objectives, values and long-term interests of the company and should incorporate measures to avoid conflicts of interest. Companies should only pay remuneration to their directors in accordance with a remuneration policy that has been approved by shareholders. The approved remuneration policy should be publicly disclosed without delay.deleted

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nils TORVALDS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17

(17) To ensure that the implementation of the remuneration policy is in line with the approved policy, shareholders should be granted the right to vote on the company’s remuneration report. In order to ensure accountability of directors the remuneration report should be clear and understandable and should provide a comprehensive overview of the remuneration granted to individual directors in the last financial year. Where the shareholders vote against the remuneration report, the company should explain in the next remuneration report how the vote of the shareholders has been taken into account.deleted

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 17 a (new)

(17a) Increased transparency regarding the activities of large companies, and in particular regarding profits made, taxes on profit paid and subsidies received, is essential for ensuring the trust of shareholders and other Union citizens in companies. Mandatory reporting in this area can therefore be seen as an important element of the corporate duty of companies to shareholders and society.

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nils TORVALDS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Cora van NIEUWENHUIZEN

Proposal for a directive
Recital 18

(18) In order to provide shareholders easy access to all relevant corporate governance information the remuneration report should be part of the corporate governance statement that listed companies should publish in accordance with article 20 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 201318 . __________________ 18Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19)deleted

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

2014/0121(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19

(19) Transactions with related parties may cause prejudice to companies and their shareholders, as they may give the related party the opportunity to appropriate value belonging to the company. Thus, adequate safeguards for the protection of shareholders’' interests are of importance. For this reason Member States should ensure that related party transactions representing more than 5 % of the companies’' assets or transactions ~~which can have a significant impact on profits or turnover~~ should be submitted either to a vote by the shareholders in a general meeting. Where the related party transaction involves a shareholder, this shareholder should be excluded from that vote. The company should not be allowed to conclude the transaction before the shareholders’ approval of the transaction or to the approval of an administrative body of the company such as independent directors assessing whether the transaction is fair and reasonable from the perspective of the company and consequently its shareholders. For transactions with related parties that represent more than 1% of their assets companies should publicly announce such transactions at the time of the conclusion of the transaction~~, and accompany the announcement by a report from an independent third p~~. Transactions entered into in the ordinarty ~~assessing whether the transaction is on market terms and confirming that the transaction is fair and reasonable from the perspective of the shareholders, including minority shareholders. Member State~~course of business or concluded on market terms or market equivalent terms should be ~~allowed to~~ exclude td. Transactions entered into between the company and its wholly or partly owned subsidiaries or joint ventures should also be excluded. Member States should also be able to allow companies to request the advance approval by shareholders for certain clearly defined types of recurrent transactions above 5 percent of the assets, and to request from shareholders an advance exemption from the obligation to produce an independent third party report foran independent administrative body for certain clearly defined types of recurrent transactions above 15 percent of the assets~~, under certain conditions, in order to facilitate the conclusion of such transactions by companies~~.

2015/02/06
Committee: JURI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The following applicants shall pay a visa fee of EUR 30: (a) minors aged over 12 years and less than 18 years; (b) visa applicants whose data are registered in the VIS and whose biometric identifiers have been collected in accordance with Article 12; (c) nationals of third countries with which the European Union has signed a readmission agreement.

2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point a

(a) minors under the age of ~~eighteen~~twelve years;

2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point e

(e) participants aged 2530 years or less in seminars, conferences, sports, cultural or educational events organised by non-profit organisations;

2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point g a (new)

(ga) recipients of a visa with limited territorial validity issued on humanitarian grounds or under an EU resettlement and relocation programme pursuant to Article 22.

2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE

2014/0094(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4

4. By way of derogation, an application that does not meet the requirements set out in paragraph 1 may be considered admissible on humanitarian grounds ~~or for reasons of national interest.~~ , for reasons of national interest, because of international obligations or under EU resettlement and relocation programmes and mechanisms as provided for in Article 8 of Directive 2001/55/EC and in the Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a crisis relocation mechanism and amending Regulation (EU) No 604/2013.

2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE

2014/0094(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1

1. A Member State may require the central authorities of other Member States to consult its central authorities during the examination of applications lodged by nationals of specific third countries or specific categories of such nationals. Such consultation shall not apply to applications for airport transit visas or to visas with limited territorial validity issued under EU resettlement and relocation programmes and mechanisms, pursuant to Article 22.

2015/09/29
Committee: LIBE

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)

- having regard to the impact assessment accompanying the document "Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online uses in the internal market

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)

- having regard to the Working Document of the Committee on Legal Affairs "Copyright in the music and audiovisual sectors", approved on 29 June 2011,

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas culture and artistic creation form the bedrock of the European identity past and present, and ~~will play a vital role in the~~make manifest the fabric of economic and social development of the European Union now, and in the future;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cultural content plays a pivotal role in the digital economy, whereas Europe's digital growth will depend in future on having a varied supply of high- quality cultural content, and whereas it has emerged from consultations and several independent surveys that the cultural and creative sectors are facing common challenges from digitisation and globalisation, along with funding problemse and artistic creation is integral to the digital economy, whereas expression of both high-end and mundane cultural content relies on equal access to Europe's digital growth, and whereas it has emerged from consultations that the European digital market still has not delivered on the promises of effective distribution, fair remuneration to creators and of fair and effective distribution of income within the cultural sector in general, and that EU-level action is needed to resolve these problems;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas digitisation is having a huge impact on the way in which cultural ~~good~~identities are being ~~produc~~expressed, distributed~~, marketed and consum~~ and developed, and whereas lower ~~distribution costs~~barriers for participation and the appearance of new distribution channels ~~can~~ facilitates access to creative works and culture and improve the circulation ~~of those works around the world~~, discovery and re-discovery of culture and artistic creation around the world and provides opportunities for creators and artists;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the proposal for a Directive on the collective management of copyright and related rights currently being discussed reinforces that ~~approach to~~ the management of copyright~~, placing~~ requires particular emphasis on the transparency of the flows of remuneration collected, distributed and paid to rightholders by collecting societies, including for private copying;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas under Directive 2001/29 /EC, Member States may provide for an exception or limitation to the reproduction right for certain types of reproduction of audio, visual and audio-visual material for private use, accompanied by fair remuneration, and may allow consumers in countries that have introduced that limitation to copy their music and audio- visual collections from one medium or type of multimedia material to another freely and as frequently as they wish, without se eking authorisation from the rightholders, provided this is for their private use; whereas ~~any levies should be calculated~~the pervasive nature and ubiquitous presence of digital works makes calculation of levies on the basis of the possible harm to the rightholders resulting from the private copying act ian ~~question~~impossible task;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the sum total of private copying levies collected in 23 of the 28 EU Member has more than tripled since Directive 2001/29/EC came into force and, according to the Commission's estimates, now stands at over EUR 600 million, and whereas this constitutes ~~a considerable amou~~less than 17% of the amount EUR 3.6 billion worth of liabilities to rightholders major collective management for ~~the artists~~ganisations had accumulated in 2010;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas these levies ~~only constitute a small proportion of the turnover of manufacturers and importers of~~, in some cases, constitute a substantial percentage of the price consumers pay for traditional and digital recording media and material;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas media and material prices do ~~not~~ vary according to the different rates of private copying levy applied across the Union,; whereas manufacturers cross- subside levies across the EU in cases where levies are a very significant proportion of the purchase price of a device; and whereas the abolition of private copying levies in Spain in 2012 has had no impact on media and material prices;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas disparities exist between the various models and collection rates for private copying levies and between their impact on consumers and the single market; and whereas a European framework should be created that guarantees that equivalent conditions apply to rightholders, consumers, manufacturers and importers of equipment and service providers across the Union until levies have been phased out;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Sajjad KARIM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Points out that the cultural sector provides 5 millions of jobs in the EU and 2.6 % of its GDP, that it is one of the main drivers for growth in Europe and a wellspring for new and non-relocatable jobs, and that it stimulates innovation and offers an effective means of combating the current recessioncontributes to its GDP, and is therefore in need of a modern legal framework adapted to the digital market;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Sajjad KARIM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that only some Member States have opted to introduce an exception for private copying, with compensation for right holders, and that the cultural sector is a strong driving force for growth also in Member States which have not opted to impose private copy levies;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Recalls that copyright law should balance the interests of inter alia creators and consumers; in this context considers that all European consumers should have a right to make private copies of legally acquired content;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Therefore calls upon the Commission to present a legislative proposal to review Directive 2001/29/EC on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society including a provision to fully harmonize exceptions and limitations with regards, inter alia, to private copying;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Sajjad KARIM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Considers further that private copying of legally acquired content constitutes a normal use of the acquired products or services by the consumer which does not harm the legitimate interests of right holders and which should thus not warrant any compensation;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that in times of budget austerity, private copying levies constitute a ~~vital source of revenue for the cultural sector, and particularly for the performance arts~~substantial cost for consumers without providing a socially accepted source of revenue for the cultural sector;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Sajjad KARIM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that private copying levies currently constitute a source of income which is of varying importance for different categories of right holders and that its importance varies significantly between Member States;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that the private copying levy system is a ~~virtuous system that balances the right to copying for private use with fair remuneration to rightholders, and that it is a system worth preserving~~n obsolete old fashioned system that should be phased out to give room for fair remuneration of artists and the right to make copies for private use;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that the major disparities between national systems for the collection of levies, especially as regards the types of product subject to the levy and the rates of levy, ~~can~~ distorts competition ~~and give rise to ‘forum shopping’ within the internal market~~, incites double payment of levies, impedes the proper functioning of the internal market and deteriorates the support for copyright among citizens;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Invites the Member States to ~~decide on a common definition of the~~phase out private copying levy,ies and to look for common ground as regards to which products should not be subject to the levy and to harmonise the negotiating arrangement for ~~the rates applicable to~~agreeing on the rates of decrease of private copying levy rates; calls on the Commission to facilitate that process;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2

Single collection procedure, clearer consumer information and more efficient reimbursement procedures during the phase out period

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that the private copying levy should ~~apply to all~~not be extended to include new materials, media and services whose value resides in their ~~private recording and~~ storage capacity;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Considers that private copying levies should be payable by ~~manufacturers or importers; notes that, if the levy were transferred to retailers, this would result in an excessiv~~the final retailer and not the manufacturer as a short and medium term measure to reach the goal of a completely phased out levy system; notes that, if the levy were transferred to retailers, this would support the development of new technologies for content delivery which reduce administrative burden for small and medium-sized distribution companies ands well as collective rights management organisations;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recommends that, in the case of cross- border transactions, private copying levies be collected in the Member State in which ~~the~~final customer resides; notes that if a product is placed on the market ~~and that the product then~~it shall be allowed to circulate freely ~~in the internal market~~ without being subject to additional levies;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Takes the view that~~, accordingly,~~ private copying levies ~~can~~should not be collected by a collective management organisation of aone Member State if remuneration of the same kind has already been collected in another Member State;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Member States, in consultation with all stakeholders, to simplify procedures for ~~setting the~~the phasing out of levies in such a way as to ensure fairness and objectivity;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG, Sajjad KARIM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Stresses the need to make clear to consumers the role of the private copying system with regard to remuneration of artists and cultural dissemination; urges Member States and rightholders to replace their anti-piracy campaigns with ‘positive’ campaigns highlighting the benefits of private copying levies;deleted

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Takes the view that consumers must be informed of the exact amount of the levy paid by them; urges the Commission and Member States accordingly, in consultation with manufacturers, importers, retailers and consumer associations, to ensure that this information is ~~indicated on packaging and, as far as possible,~~explicit on invoices and receipts issued to consumers at the retailer level;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Urges Member States to adopt ~~more~~ transparent exemption ~~arrangement~~rules regarding professional uses to ensure that they are exempt, also in practice, from private copy levies in compliance with CJEU case law;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Member States to ~~introduce efficient arrangements for the reimbursement of private copy levies where the media in question is used for professional purposes;~~ ensure that private copy levies never have to be paid where the media in question is used for professional purposes and that various arrangements for the reimbursement of levies paid for professional users are replaced with systems which guarantee that these users are not liable to pay the levy in the first place;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3

Transparency regarding allocation of revenue ~~and cultural policy~~

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Member States to earmark at least 25% of revenue from private copying levies to promote the ~~creative and performance arts~~smooth phasing out of the system as a whole;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Member States to publish reports on the allocation of ~~proceeds in open~~ resources for~~mat with interpretable data~~ the smooth phasing out of the system as a whole;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

~~19. Urges the organisers of cultural events and performances receiving funding from private copying levies to make their public more aware of this by means of additional publicity;~~deleted

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Points out that private copying exemption ~~arrangem~~gives citizents ~~enable consumers~~the right to copy freely their musical and audio-visual material from one medium or type of multimedia material to another without the need to seek the authorisation of rightholders, provided that this is for private use;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the elimination of technical protection measures ~~causing an imbalance between freedom to copy and fair remuneration for rightholders under private copying arrangemen~~which would impede the freedom of citizens to make use of their legal right to make copies for personal use as it also undermines a fair remuneration of artists;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Sajjad KARIM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Points out that the implementation of exclusive rights does not guarantee all rightholders, and in particular performance artists, a fair and proportional share of revenue arising from the use of their works;deleted

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Observes that~~, despite permanent access to online works, download~~ storage and copying of works for offline use is increasing with increasing, storage ~~and private copying for offline use is continuing~~capacity of storage media; takes the view that a private copying levy system cannot therefore be ~~replaced by a licencing system~~upheld and has to be phased out;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Notes that the modern digital economy is providing a large multitude of online services where some services technically require copying of the content and others do not and where some of these services would thus be subject to private copying levies and others would not; takes the view that a private copying levy system should therefore be phased out in order not to discriminate between services;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Stresses that~~, as for online services, contractual authorisations cannot be allowed to prevail to the detriment of private copying exception arrangem~~ licensing provisions should not limit the legal rights of citizens to make private copies of legally acquired contents;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Takes the view that private copies of protected works made using new cloud computing technology may have ~~the same~~new purposes as compared to those made using traditional and/or digital recording media and materials; considers that ~~these copies should be taken into account by the~~such new media and services should not be included in current private copying compensation mechanisms;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Christian ENGSTRÖM, Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Calls on the Commission to assess the impact on the private copying system of the use of cloud computing technology for the private recording and storage of protected works, so as to determine how these private copies of protected works should be ~~taken into account by the~~excluded from private copying compensation mechanisms;

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2114(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Sajjad KARIM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Calls on the Commission and Member States to examine the possibility of legalising works sharing for non- commercial purposes so as to guarantee consumers access to a wide variety of content and real choice in terms of cultural diversity;deleted

2013/10/21
Committee: JURI

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Michael CASHMAN, Ulrike LUNACEK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas these organisations have expressed and recorded their concerns, particularly with regard to the situation of Roma, migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, minorities, members of LGBT communities, the media and journalists, the actions of the security forces, police and secret services, the investigations necessary to prosecute and punish those responsible for human rights violations, state involvement in acts of torture and ill- treatment committed third countries, the use of evidence thus obtained, conditions of detention and the ill-treatment of detainees;

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Rui TAVARES, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Ulrike LUNACEK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marie-Christine VERGIAT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for the creation, preferably under an inter-institutional agreement, of a "Copenhagen commission" composed of independent high-level experts on fundamental rights, to be appointed also by the EP, whose aim shall be to ensure compliance by all Member States with the common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU, the continuity of the 'Copenhagen criteria' and advising and reporting in relation to fundamental rights matters, awaiting for the modification of the Regulation of the Fundamental Rights Agency to allow it to have a wider scope and stronger powers, as requested by the EP repeatedly;

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Michael CASHMAN, Ulrike LUNACEK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Kinga GÖNCZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the fact that a growing number of Member States are respecting the right to found a family through marriage, civil partnership or registered cohabitation and adoption, without discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, and calls on the remaining Member States to do the same; welcomes the recent judgment by the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Vallianatos and others v. Greece affirming that same-sex couples must be able to enter into civil unions; calls on the Commission and all Member States to propose and adopt legislation and policies to combat homophobia, transphobia and hate crimes, and welcomes the publication of Opinion No 2/2013 of the FRA on the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia - with special attention to the rights of victims of crime; calls on the Commission and all Member States to enforce the directive on freedom of movement without discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation; reiterates its calls for the Commission to draw up a European roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, and to propose an ambitious regulation on the mutual recognition of the legal effects of civil status documents;

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Michael CASHMAN, Ulrike LUNACEK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Kinga GÖNCZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Is extremely concerned about the number of suicides among young people falling victims of homophobia; recalls the findings of the FRA's EU LGBT survey which showed that 26% of all respondents had been attacked or threatened with violence at home or elsewhere, a figure which rises to 35% among all transgender respondents, while 19% of respondents felt discriminated against at work or when looking for a job, despite legal protection under EU law; consequently calls on the Commission to use these findings as a basis for a comprehensive European response to the fundamental rights problems of LGBT persons, in the shape of an EU Roadmap for equality on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, as repeatedly called for by Parliament and NGOs;

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Michael CASHMAN, Ulrike LUNACEK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Kinga GÖNCZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)

13b. Regrets that legal gender recognition procedures for transgender people still include compulsory sterilisation in 14 Member States; calls on Member States to review these procedures so they fully respect transgender people's right to dignity and bodily integrity; congratulates the Commission for its commitment to work within the World Health Organisation to withdraw gender identity disorders from the list of mental and behavioural disorders and to ensure a non-pathologising reclassification in the negotiations on the 11th version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11);

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Michael CASHMAN, Ulrike LUNACEK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Kinga GÖNCZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Expresses its concern about the numerous breaches of the right of asylum and of the obligation to extend protection in the event of removal, expulsion and extradition of any migrant; stresses the obligation to comply with international human rights conventions, particularly the Geneva Convention and the principle of non-refoulement, and the obligation to come to the assistance of people at sea who are risking their lives to reach the European Union, and to arrange for reception conditions and procedures which respect their dignity and fundamental rights; welcomes the adoption of the ‘'asylum’' package; deplores, however, the fact that ~~minors~~children can still be placed in detention and calls for them to be systematically excluded from expedited procedures; calls for the establishment of common minimum standards for the reception and protection of unaccompanied ~~minors~~children; welcomes the recent ECJ judgment stating that LGBT applicants for asylum can constitute a particular social group who may be persecuted on account of their sexual orientation and that the existence of a term of imprisonment in the country of origin sanctioning homosexual acts may constitute an act of persecution per se, provided that it is actually applied, while asylum seekers seeking protection from sexual orientation based persecution cannot be expected to "conceal [their] homosexuality in [their] country of origin or exercise restraint in expressing it";

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Michael CASHMAN, Ulrike LUNACEK, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Kinga GÖNCZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Considers that the Union and Member States should step up their measures to promote equality, combat discrimination and protect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity, and their measures relating to gender equality, the rights of the child, the rights of older persons, the integration of people with disabilities and the rights of LGBT persons; reiterates for the umpteenth time its call for the Council to adopt the Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation; welcomes the FRA Opinion 1/2013 on the situation of equality in the European Union 10 years on from initial implementation of the equality directives in this regard;

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2078(INI)

Louis MICHEL, Monika BEŇOVÁ, Ulrike LUNACEK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Kinga GÖNCZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Calls for stronger action to help homeless persons and provide them with shelter and support, condemns laws and policies at national or local level criminalizing those persons, who are more in need, as this amounts to a striking and inhumane violation of fundamental rights,

2013/11/13
Committee: LIBE

2013/2031(REG)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Rule 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. The Member concerned shall be given an opportunity to be heard, may present any documents or other written evidence deemed by that Member to be relevant and may be represented by another Member. The Member shall not be present during debates on the request for waiver or defence of his or her immunity, except for the hearing itself. The Chair of the committee shall invite the Member to be heard, indicating a date and time. The Member may waive the right to be heard. If the Member fails to attend the hearing pursuant to that invitation, he or she shall be deemed to have waived the right to be heard, unless he or she asks to be excused from being heard at the date and time proposed, giving reasons. The coordinators of the committee are empowered to rule, upon a recommendation by the rapporteur, whether such a request is to be accepted in view of the reasons given. No appeals are permitted on this point. If the coordinators of the committee grant the request to be excused, the chair of the committee shall invite the Member to be heard at a new date and time. If the Member fails to comply with the second invitation to be heard, the procedure shall continue without the Member having been heard. No further requests to be excused, or to be heard, may then be accepted.

2013/06/26
Committee: JURI

2013/0309(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36

(36) In a context of progressive migration to ‘'all IP networks’', the lack of availability of connectivity products based on the IP protocol for different classes of services with assured service quality that enable communication paths across network domains and across network borders, both within and between Member States, hinders the development of applications that rely on access to other networks, thus limiting technological innovation. Moreover, this situation prevents the diffu defined quality of service within closed communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission con a wider scale of efficiencies which are associated with the management and provision of IP-based networks and connectivity products with an assured service quality level, in particular enhanced security, reliability and flexibility, cost-effectiveness and faster provisioning, which benefit network operators, service providers and end userstrol could hinder the development of services that rely on this defined quality in order to function adequately. A harmonised approach to the design and availability of these ~~product~~services is therefore necessary, ~~on reasonable terms including, where requested, the possibility of cross-supply by the electronic communications undertakings concerned~~including safeguards to guarantee that the enhanced quality is not functionally identical or to the detriment of the performance, affordability or quality of internet access services or undermines competition, innovation or net neutrality.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45

(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The key driver of the unprecedented innovation and economic activity in the digital age has been the fact that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application; conform the principle of net neutrality. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules to enshrine the principle of net neutrality in law at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47

(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public sh~~ould, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services,~~all not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of clearly defined reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures sh~~ould~~all be transparent, proportionate and non- discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management could encompass~~es prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including~~ voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography subject to judicial review. Minimising the effects of network congestion shcould be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50

(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time- sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public ~~is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in~~could foster the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such ~~agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services~~defined levels of quality are technically necessary for the functionality of the service and these agreements do not impair the quality of internet access services, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51

(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. National regulatory authorities should establish clear and comprehensible notification and redress mechanisms for end-users subjected to discrimination, restriction or interference of online content, services or applications. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end- users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

ea) to ensure that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application;

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12

(12) ‘assured service quality (ASQ) connectivity product’ means a product that is made available at the internet protocol (IP) exchange, which enables customers to set up an IP communication link between a point of interconnection and one or several fixed network termination points, and enables defined levels of end to end network performance for the provision of specific services to end users on the basis of the delivery of a specified guaranteed quality of service, based on specified parameters;deleted

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12 a (new)

(12a) "net neutrality" means the principle that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application;

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15

(15) ‘'specialised service’' means an electronic communications service, or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute forperated within closed electronic communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission control; and that is not marketed or used as a substitute for internet access service or functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service;

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19

~~[...]~~deleted

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2

2. The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down uniform technical and methodological rules for the implementation of one or more of the European access products within the meaning of Articles 17 and ~~19 and~~ of Annex I, points 2 and 3, ~~and Annex II,~~ in accordance with the respective criteria and parameters specified therein. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

End-users sha~~ll be free~~ve the right to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services or devices of their choice via their internet access service, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

EWith due account to the principle of net neutrality, end-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services ~~and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes,~~, provided they freely and explicitly give their informed consent, and to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service. Where such agreements are concluded with the provider of internet access services, that provider shall ensure that the enhanced quality of service is not to the detriment of the performance, affordability or quality of internet access services, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic within closed electronic communications networks as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity, which are not functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service. The provision of specialised services shall not impair ~~in a recurring~~ the quality of internet access services. Where network c~~ontinuous manner the general quality of internet access services~~apacity is shared between internet access services and specialised services, the provider of these services shall publish clear and unambiguous criteria based on which network capacity is shared.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereofProviders of internet access services shall treat all internet traffic in accordance with the principle of net neutrality, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate, subject to clear, comprehensible and accessible redress mechanisms and necessary to:

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a

a) implement a legislative provision or a court order~~, or prevent or impede serious crimes~~;

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d

d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided ~~that equivalent types of~~all traffic ~~are~~is treated equally.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph. Therefore all techniques to inspect or analyse data shall be in accordance with privacy and data protection legislation. By default, such techniques should only examine header information.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1

1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non- discriminatory internet access services in accordance with the principle of net neutrality and at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Marietje SCHAAKE, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. National regulatory authorities shall establish clear and comprehensible notification and redress mechanisms for end-users subjected to discrimination, restriction, interference, blocking or throttling of online content, services or applications.

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0309(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Marietje SCHAAKE

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 2

MINIMUM PARAMETERS OF EUROPEAN ASQ CONNECTIVITY PRODUCTS Network elements and related information - A description of the connectivity product to be provided over a fixed network, including technical characteristics and adoption of any relevant standards. Network functionalities: – connectivity agreement ensuring end-to- end Quality of Service, based on common specified parameters that enable the provision of at least the following classes of services: – voice and video calls; – broadcast of audio-visual content; and – data critical applications.deleted

2014/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36

(36) In a context of progressive migration to ‘all IP networks’, the lack of availability of connectivity products based on the IP protocol for different classes of services with assured service quality that enable communication paths across network domains and across network borders, both within and between Member States, hinders the development of applications that rely on access to other networks, thus limiting technological innovation. Moreover, this situation prevents the diffu defined quality of service within closed communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission con a wider scale of efficiencies which are associated with the management and provision of IP-based networks and connectivity products with an assured service quality level, in particular enhanced security, reliability and flexibility, cost-effectiveness and faster provisioning, which benefit network operators, service providers and end userstrol could hinder the development of services that rely on this defined quality in order to function adequately. A harmonised approach to the design and availability of these ~~product~~services is therefore necessary, ~~on reasonable terms including, where requested, the possibility of cross-supply by the electronic communications undertakings concerned~~including safeguards to guarantee that the enhanced quality is not functionally identical or to the detriment of the performance, affordability or quality of internet access services or undermines competition, innovation or net neutrality.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45

(45) The internet has developed over the past decades as an open platform for innovation with low access barriers for end-users, content and application providers and internet service providers. The key driver of the unprecedented innovation and economic activity in the digital age has been the fact that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application; conform the principle of net neutrality. The existing regulatory framework aims at promoting the ability of end-users to access and distribute information or run applications and services of their choice. Recently, however, the report of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on traffic management practices published in May 2012 and a study, commissioned by the Executive Agency for Consumers and Health and published in December 2012, on the functioning of the market of internet access and provision from a consumer perspective, showed that a significant number of end-users are affected by traffic management practices which block or slow down specific applications. These tendencies require clear rules to enshrine the principle of net neutrality in law at the Union level to maintain the open internet and to avoid fragmentation of the single market resulting from individual Member States' measures.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47

(47) In an open internet, providers of electronic communications to the public sh~~ould, within contractually agreed limits on data volumes and speeds for internet access services,~~all not block, slow down, degrade or discriminate against specific content, applications or services or specific classes thereof except for a limited number of clearly defined reasonable traffic management measures. Such measures sh~~ould~~all be transparent, proportionate and non- discriminatory. Reasonable traffic management could encompass~~es prevention or impediment of serious crimes, including~~ voluntary actions of providers to prevent access to and distribution of child pornography subject to judicial review. Minimising the effects of network congestion shcould be considered reasonable provided that network congestion occurs only temporarily or in exceptional circumstances.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50

(50) In addition, there is demand on the part of content, applications and services providers, for the provision of transmission services based on flexible quality parameters, including lower levels of priority for traffic which is not time- sensitive. The possibility for content, applications and service providers to negotiate such flexible quality of service levels with providers of electronic communications to the public ~~is necessary for the provision of specialised services and is expected to play an important role in~~could foster the development of new services such as machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. At the same time such arrangements should allow providers of electronic communications to the public to better balance traffic and prevent network congestion. Providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public should therefore be free to conclude specialised services agreements on defined levels of quality of service as long as such ~~agreements do not substantially impair the general quality of internet access services~~defined levels of quality are technically necessary for the functionality of the service and these agreements do not impair the quality of internet access services, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51

(51) National regulatory authorities play an essential role in ensuring that end-users are effectively able to exercise this freedom to avail of open internet access. To this end national regulatory authorities should have monitoring and reporting obligations, and ensure compliance of providers of electronic communications to the public and the availability of non-discriminatory internet access services of high quality which are not impaired by specialised services. National regulatory authorities should establish clear and comprehensible notification and redress mechanisms for end-users subjected to discrimination, restriction or interference of online content, services or applications. In their assessment of a possible general impairment of internet access services, national regulatory authorities should take account of quality parameters such as timing and reliability parameters (latency, jitter, packet loss), levels and effects of congestion in the network, actual versus advertised speeds, performance of internet access services compared with specialised services, and quality as perceived by end- users. National regulatory authorities should be empowered to impose minimum quality of service requirements on all or individual providers of electronic communications to the public if this is necessary to prevent general impairment/degradation of the quality of service of internet access services.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

ea) to ensure that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application;

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12

(12) ‘assured service quality (ASQ) connectivity product’ means a product that is made available at the internet protocol (IP) exchange, which enables customers to set up an IP communication link between a point of interconnection and one or several fixed network termination points, and enables defined levels of end to end network performance for the provision of specific services to end users on the basis of the delivery of a specified guaranteed quality of service, based on specified parameters;deleted

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 12 a (new)

(12a) "net neutrality" means the principle that all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independent of its sender, receiver, type, content, device, service or application;

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point 15

(15) ‘specialised service’ means an electronic communications service, or any other service that provides the capability to access specific content, applications or services, or a combination thereof, and whose technical characteristics are controlled from end-to-end or provides the capability to send or receive data to or from a determined number of parties or endpoints; and that is not marketed or widely used as a substitute forperated within closed electronic communications networks using the Internet Protocol with strict admission control; and that is not marketed or used as a substitute for internet access service or functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service;

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19

Article 19 – Assured service quality (ASQ) connectivity product 1. Any operator shall have the right to provide a European ASQ connectivity product as specified in paragraph 4. 2. Any operator shall meet any reasonable request to provide a European ASQ connectivity product as specified in paragraph 4 submitted in writing by an authorised provider of electronic communications services. Any refusal to provide a European ASQ product shall be based on objective criteria. The operator shall state the reasons for any refusal within one month from the written request. It shall be deemed to be an objective ground of refusal that the party requesting the supply of a European ASQ connectivity product is unable or unwilling to make available, whether within the Union or in third countries, a European ASQ connectivity product to the requested party on reasonable terms, if the latter so requests. 3. Where the request is refused or agreement on specific terms and conditions, including price, has not been reached within two months from the written request, either party is entitled to refer the issue to the relevant national regulatory authority pursuant to Article 20 of Directive 2002/21/EC. In such a case, Article 3(6) of this Regulation may apply. 4. The provision of a connectivity product shall be considered as the provision of a European ASQ connectivity product if it is supplied in accordance with the minimum parameters listed in Annex II and cumulatively meets the following substantive requirements: (a) ability to be offered as a high quality product anywhere in the Union; (b) enabling service providers to meet the needs of their end-users; (c) cost-effectiveness, taking into account existing solutions that may be provided on the same networks; (d) operational effectiveness, in particular in respect of limiting to the extent possible implementation obstacles and deployment costs for customers; and (e) ensuring that the rules on protection of privacy, personal data, security and integrity of networks and transparency in accordance with Union law are respected. 5. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 32 in order to adapt Annex II in light of market and technological developments, so as to continue to meet the substantive requirements listed in paragraph 4.deleted

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2

2. The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down uniform technical and methodological rules for the implementation of one or more of the European access products within the meaning of Articles 17 and ~~19 and~~ of Annex I, points 2 and 3, ~~and Annex II,~~ in accordance with the respective criteria and parameters specified therein. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 33(2).

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

End-users sha~~ll be free~~ve the right to access and distribute information and content, run applications and use services or devices of their choice via their internet access service, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

EWith due account to the principle of net neutrality, end-users shall be free to enter into agreements on data volumes and speeds with providers of internet access services ~~and, in accordance with any such agreements relative to data volumes,~~, provided they freely and explicitly give their informed consent, and to avail of any offers by providers of internet content, applications and services.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

End-users shall also be free to agree with either providers of electronic communications to the public or with providers of content, applications and services on the provision of specialised services with an enhanced quality of service. Where such agreements are concluded with the provider of internet access services, that provider shall ensure that the enhanced quality of service is not to the detriment of the performance, affordability or quality of internet access services, in accordance with the principle of net neutrality.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

In order to enable the provision of specialised services to end-users, providers of content, applications and services and providers of electronic communications to the public shall be free to enter into agreements with each other to transmit the related data volumes or traffic within closed electronic communications networks as specialised services with a defined quality of service or dedicated capacity, which are not functionally identical to services available over the public internet access service. The provision of specialised services shall not impair ~~in a recurring~~ the quality of internet access services. Where network c~~ontinuous manner the general quality of internet access services~~apacity is shared between internet access services and specialised services, the provider of these services shall publish clear and unambiguous criteria based on which network capacity is shared.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Within the limits of any contractually agreed data volumes or speeds for internet access services, providers of internet access services shall not restrict the freedoms provided for in paragraph 1 by blocking, slowing down, degrading or discriminating against specific content, applications or services, or specific classes thereofProviders of internet access services shall treat all internet traffic in accordance with the principle of net neutrality, except in cases where it is necessary to apply reasonable traffic management measures. Reasonable traffic management measures shall be transparent, non-discriminatory, proportionate, subject to clear, comprehensible and accessible redress mechanisms and necessary to:

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a

a) implement a legislative provision or a court order~~, or prevent or impede serious crimes~~;

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d

d) minimise the effects of temporary or exceptional network congestion provided ~~that equivalent types of~~all traffic ~~are~~is treated equally.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

Reasonable traffic management shall only entail processing of data that is necessary and proportionate to achieve the purposes set out in this paragraph. Therefore all techniques to inspect or analyse data shall be in accordance with privacy and data protection legislation. By default, such techniques should only examine header information.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1

1. National regulatory authorities shall closely monitor and ensure the effective ability of end-users to benefit from the freedoms provided for in Article 23 (1) and (2), compliance with Article 23 (5), and the continued availability of non- discriminatory internet access services in accordance with the principle of net neutrality and at levels of quality that reflect advances in technology and that are not impaired by specialised services. They shall, in cooperation with other competent national authorities, also monitor the effects of specialised services on cultural diversity and innovation. National regulatory authorities shall report on an annual basis to the Commission and BEREC on their monitoring and findings.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. National regulatory authorities shall establish clear and comprehensible notification and redress mechanisms for end-users subjected to discrimination, restriction, interference, blocking or throttling of online content, services or applications.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0306(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

Regulation (EU) No 531/2012
Article 6a

(3a) The following article is inserted: Article 6a Abolition of retail roaming charges With effect from 1 July 2015, roaming providers shall not levy any surcharge in comparison to the charges for mobile communications services at domestic level on roaming customers for any regulated roaming call made or received, for any regulated roaming SMS message sent, for any roaming MMS message sent or for any regulated data roaming services used- or any general charge to enable the terminal equipment or service to be used abroad.

2013/12/20
Committee: JURI

2013/0110(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 1 – point a

Directive 78/660/EEC
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point b – subparagraph 2

Where a company does not pursue policies in relation to one or more of these matters, it shall provide an clear and reasoned explanation for not doing so.

2013/11/15
Committee: JURI

2013/0110(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2

Directive 78/660/EEC
Article 46 a

(2) Article 46a is amended as follows: ‘(a) In paragraph 1, the following point (g) is added: ‘(g) a description of the company's diversity policy for its administrative, management and supervisory bodies with regard to aspects such as age, gender, geographical diversity, educational and professional background, the objectives of this diversity policy, how it has been implemented and the results in the reporting period. If the company has no such policy, the statement shall contain a clear and reasoned explanation as to why this is the case. (b) The following paragraph 4 is added: ‘4. Point (g) of paragraph 1 does not apply to companies within the meaning of Article 27.deleted

2013/11/15
Committee: JURI

2013/0110(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 2 – point a

Directive 78/660/EEC
Article 46 a – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) a description of the company's diversity policy for its administrative, management and supervisory bodies with regard to gender and other aspects such as age, ~~gender, geographical diversity~~disability, ethnic or national origin, educational and professional background, the objectives of this diversity policy, how it has been implemented and the results in the reporting period. If the ~~company~~undertaking has no such policy, the statement shall contain a clear and reasoned explanation as to why this is the case.

2013/11/15
Committee: JURI

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new) – point d

(d) In Article 19, the following paragraphs are inserted: '1a. For large undertakings whose average number of employees during the financial year exceeds 500, the review shall also include a non-financial statement containing information relating to, as a minimum, environmental, social and employee matters, respect for human rights, and the fight against corruption and bribery, including: (a) a description of the policies pursued by the undertaking in relation to these matters, (b) the results of those policies; (c) the risks related to matters linked to the undertaking's activities, operations, products and services or through its business relationships which are likely to cause adverse impacts in these areas; (d) how the company manages those risks, including through due diligence processes. Where the undertaking does not pursue policies in relation to one or more of these matters, the review shall provide a clear and reasoned explanation for not doing so. In providing the information required by the first subparagraph, the undertaking shall rely on national, EU-based or international frameworks, and if so, the undertaking shall specify which frameworks it has relied upon. 1b. To the extent necessary for an understanding of the undertaking's current and future development, performance or position and for the transparency and comparability of the review, the analysis referred to in paragraph 1 shall include both financial and non-financial key performance indicators relevant to the particular business. 1c. In providing the analysis referred to in paragraph 1, the management report shall, where appropriate, include references to, and additional explanations of, amounts reported in the annual financial statements.

2013/11/15
Committee: JURI

2013/0110(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new) – point e

Directive 2013/34/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

(e) In Article 20(1), the following point is inserted: (ca) In order to assess the proportionality of tax reduction methods employed by an undertaking, a description of the undertaking's tax planning arrangements should be specified which at least include: (i) aggressive tax planning arrangements including the general substance of advice received; (ii) transfer pricing arrangements and whether the transfer prices have been agreed by the revenue authorities in each of the countries concerned; (iii) permanent establishment decisions and a list of countries where the undertaking trades without having a permanent establishment; (iv) base erosion methods via interest deduction, royalties and other financial payments, including where brands are developed, where they are paid for by subsidiaries and whether they are owned by the parent company in their main operating base or if not, where domiciled for tax purposes; (v) where research and development takes place and how this is recovered from subsidiaries.

2013/11/15
Committee: JURI

2013/0110(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new) – point e

Directive 2013/34/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)

(e) In Article 20, the following paragraph 1 a is inserted: 1a. Member States shall require large undertakings and all public-interest entities to publicly disclose annually a country-by-country report on a consolidated basis for the financial year. These obligations shall not apply to any undertaking governed by the law of a Member State which is a subsidiary or parent undertaking, where both of the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the parent undertaking is subject to the laws of a Member State; and (b) the country-by-country report made by the undertaking are included in the consolidated report on payment to governments drawn up by that parent undertaking in accordance with Article 39. The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be audited in accordance with Directive 2006/43/EC. The Commission shall conduct a general assessment report as regards potential economic consequences of the public disclosure of the country-by-country report, except those entities which publically disclose in accordance with Article 42, including the impact on competitiveness and investment, and may consider recommending that this information should be available to the competent tax authorities, only in the case of a negative assessment. The Commission shall submit its report to the Council and the European Parliament by 31 December 2015.

2013/11/15
Committee: JURI

2013/0110(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 a (new) – point e

Directive 2013/34/EU
Article 20 – paragraph 3

(e) In Article 20, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: '3. The statutory auditor or audit firm shall express an opinion in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 34(1) regarding information prepared under points (c), (ca), (cb) and (d) of paragraph 1 of this Article and shall check that the information referred to in points (a), (b), (e), (f), and (g) of paragraph 1 and paragraph 1a of this Article has been provided.'

2013/11/15
Committee: JURI

2013/0110(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 80

Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
Article 93 a – point p

(p) derogations from the obligation to be represented before the Agency pursuant to Article 92(2), the conditions under which a common representative shall be appointed ~~pursuant to Article 92(4)~~, the conditions under which employees referred to in Article 92(3) and professional representatives referred to in Article 93(1) must file with the Agency a signed authorisation in order to be able to undertake representation, the content of that authorisation, and the conditions under which a person may be removed from the list of professional representatives ~~referred to in Article 93(5)~~.';

2013/10/31
Committee: JURI

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Third-country nationals falling within the scope of this Directive and being authorised to enter and stay on the territory of a Member State on the basis of a long-stay visa shall be entitled to equal treatment with nationals of the host Member State as regards the rights referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article.

2013/09/11
Committee: LIBE

2013/0025(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a of this Article shall include but not be limited to information on the beneficial owner's full name, date of birth, the means of exercising control over the company, contact details and information detailing the legal shareholders.

2013/12/09
Committee: ECON LIBE

2013/0025(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Registers referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be interconnected and easily accessible by competent authorities, obliged entities and publically available.

2013/12/09
Committee: ECON LIBE

2013/0025(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 1a of this Article shall be easily accessible by competent authorities, obliged entities and publically available in a timely manner.

2013/12/09
Committee: ECON LIBE

2013/0025(COD)

Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 3

3. The FIU shall be established as a central national unit. It shall be responsible for receiving (and to the extent permitted, requesting), analysing and disseminating to the competent authorities, disclosures of information which concern potential money laundering or associated predicate offences, including tax crimes, potential terrorist financing or are required by national legislation or regulation. The FIU shall be provided with adequate financial, technical and human resources in order to fulfil its tasks. Member States shall ensure that the FIU is free from undue interference.

2013/12/11
Committee: ECON LIBE

2012/2870(RSP)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9

– having regard to the fact that Turkey has committed itself to reforms~~, good neighbourly relations~~ and progressive alignment with the EU, and that these efforts should be viewed as an opportunity for Turkey itself to continue to modernise, and consolidate and further improve its democratic institutions, the rule of law and the observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

2013/02/12
Committee: AFET

2012/2870(RSP)

Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU, Angelika WERTHMANN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Ana GOMES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Encourages Turkey to adopt the Human Rights Action Plan as prepared by the Ministry of Justice, in cooperation with the Council of Europe, based on the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in order to address issues raised in judgements of the ECtHR where Turkey was found to violate the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR); urges Turkey to intensify its efforts towards full implementation of ECtHR case law and supports the Ministry of Justice and the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors (HCoJP) in providing judges and prosecutors with human rights training; welcomes the establishment by the HCoJP of new assessment criteria for judges and prosecutors rewarding respect for the provisions of the ECHR and judgements of the ECtHR;

2013/02/12
Committee: AFET

2012/2870(RSP)

Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Ana GOMES

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 that Turkey 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; recalls that recognition of all EU Member states is a necessary component of the accession process. Accordingly, Turkey is urged to proceed with normalisation of its relations with all EU Member states the soonest the possible, including lifting its veto of EU Member states membership of several international organizations;

2013/02/12
Committee: AFET

2012/2870(RSP)

Antigoni PAPADOPOULOU, Angelika WERTHMANN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Ana GOMES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25a (new)

25a. Emphasises that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has been signed by the EU, the 27 Member States and all other candidate countries and that it is part of the acquis communautaire; calls, therefore, on the Government of Turkey to sign and ratify it without further delay; recalls the full legitimacy of the Republic of Cyprus' exclusive economic zone, in accordance with UNCLOS;

2013/02/12
Committee: AFET

2012/2309(INI)

Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Olle SCHMIDT, Marit PAULSEN, Kent JOHANSSON, Morten LØKKEGAARD, Nils TORVALDS

Proposal for a Decision establishing the composition of the European Parliament
Article 3

Pursuant to Article 1, the number of representatives in the European Parliament elected in each Member State is hereby set as follows, with effect from the beginning of the 2014-2019 parliamentary term: Belgium 21 Bulgaria 17 Czech Republic 21 Denmark 13 Germany 96 Estonia 6 Ireland 11 Greece 21 Spain 54 France 74 Croatia 11 Italy 73 Cyprus 6 Latvia 8 Lithuania 11 Luxembourg 6 Hungary 21 Malta 6 Netherlands 26 Austria 198 Poland 51 Portugal 21 Romania 32 Slovenia 8 Slovakia 13 Finland 13 Sweden 1920 United Kingdom 73

2013/02/01
Committee: AFCO

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Commission to draw up binding strategic guidelines for use by all Member States, which should draw inspiration from their best practices, take the form of common minimum standards and detail each stage in the process, from the arrival of a minor in European territory until a~~n appropriat~~ durable solution has been found for him;

2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on Member States, as soon as a minor arrives within their territory and until a ~~lasting~~durable solution has been found, to appoint a ~~perso~~guardian responsible for accompanying, assisting and representing him in all procedures; calls furthermore for this person to have specific training in the problems associated with unaccompanied minors and to act completely independently; calls on the Commission to establish common standards concerning the mandate, functions, qualifications and skills of this person;

2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Recalls that all procedures must be ~~appropriate for minors and that the point of~~sensitive to the needs of children in line with the Council of Europe Guidelines on Child Friendly Justice and welcomes the activities of the Commission in promoting these guidelines; the views of the minor should be listened to and taken into account in all procedures;

2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE

2012/2263(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Welcomes the progress which has been made in asylum legislation; recalls, however, that unaccompanied minors should always be exempted from expedited procedures and from procedures at the border; recalls also that the State responsible for an asylum application by an unaccompanied minor should always be the State of the most recent asylum application, unless this is not in the child's best interests;

2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE

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 a~~n appropriat~~ durable solution for him, which respects his interests; recalls that efforts to achieve this must always begin with an examination of the possibilities of family reunification, provided that this is in the child's best interests;

2013/05/13
Committee: LIBE

2012/2223(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Points out the need for monitoring relationships and improving coordination between Member States and between existing instruments as well as identifying gaps and overlaps;

2012/10/03
Committee: LIBE

2012/2223(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on Member States to increase their capacities to respond to the obligations under the Solidarity Clause to "act jointly" and to "assist"';

2012/10/03
Committee: LIBE

2012/2223(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to use a broad definition of disasters and attacks, also taking into account cyber terrorism, and emergencies emanating from ~~sudden migration flows or from~~ serious incidents happening outside the Union with a direct and substantial impact on a Member State;

2012/10/03
Committee: LIBE

2012/2223(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Renate WEBER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Points out that all responses to a terrorist attack or a natural or man-made disaster as well as actions to prevent them must be proportionate and respect the fundamental rights of EU citizens, including the protection of their personal data;

2012/10/03
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Claude MORAES, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Boris ZALA, Hannu TAKKULA

Motion for a resolution
Recital BS

BS. whereas the respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities is explicitly recognised among the values referred to in Article 2 TEU and the Union is committed to promoting these values and combating social exclusion, racism, anti- Semitism and discrimination;

2013/05/22
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Claude MORAES, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Boris ZALA, Hannu TAKKULA

Motion for a resolution
Recital BT

BT. whereas the responsibility of Member States to ensure that the fundamental rights of all are respected, irrespective of their ethnicity or belief, covers all levels of public administration as well as the law enforcement authorities and also implies actively promoting tolerance and firmly condemning phenomena such as racial violence ~~and hate speech~~, anti-Semitic and anti-Roma hate speech, particularly when it is expressed in official or public forums including in the Hungarian parliament;

2013/05/22
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Claude MORAES, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Boris ZALA, Hannu TAKKULA

Motion for a resolution
Recital BW

BW. whereas, although intolerance against the members of Roma and Jewish communities is not a problem solely associated with Hungary and other Member States are faced with the same predicament, recent events have raised concerns as to the increase in anti-Roma and anti-Semitic ~~discourse~~hate speech in Hungary;

2013/05/22
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Welcomes the Commission's proposal for a permanent scoreboard on justice in all 27 EU Member States as put forward by Vice-President Reding, which shows that safeguarding the independence of the judiciary is a general concern of the EU, but calls for its enlargement to cover also criminal justice, fundamental rights, the Rule of law and democracy, as already requested by the European Parliament;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Claude MORAES, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Boris ZALA, Hannu TAKKULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44

44. Notes that the Hungarian Parliament has enacted legislation in criminal and civil areas to combat racial incitement and hate speech;, points out, however, that legislation on its own cannot achieve the goal of creating a society free from intolerance and discrimination throughout Europe, especially when it is not being actively implemented;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Claude MORAES, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Boris ZALA, Hannu TAKKULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45

45. Underlines that the authorities in all Member States have a positive obligation to act to avoid violation of the rights of persons belonging to minorities ~~and~~, cannot remain neutral and should take the necessary legal, educational and political measures when faced with such violations;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Gianni VATTIMO, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 d (new)

45d. Expresses serious concern on the insertion of provisions in the Hungarian Constitution through the Fourth Amendment that enable the Parliament or local governments to criminalize homelessness, in contradiction to the Hungarian Constitutional Court previous judgment that had abolished, among others, similar provisions contained in the Petty Offence Act, stating that criminalizing the status of homelessness is unconstitutional, since it violates human dignity; calls on the Hungarian authorities to delete this provision from the Constitution, and calls on the Commission and the Council to do the same;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Concludes – for the reasons explained above – that the systemic and general ~~trend of~~ repeatedly modif~~ying~~ication of the constitutional and legal framework in very short time frames, and the content of such modifications, are incompatible with the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, Article 3, paragraph 1 and Article 6 TEU and deviate from the principles referred to in Article 4, paragraph 3 TEU; considers that -this constitutes a clear risk of a serious breach of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU and considers that, unless corrected in a timely and sufficient manner -, this ~~trend will result in a clear risk of a serious breach~~will lead to the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2 ~~TEU~~;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51

51. ~~States that it is ready – and c~~Calls on the Council and Commission to ~~also be prepared~~ – in the event that Hungary does not implement the recommendations set out in paragraph 61, to take action under Article 7(12) TEU to determine the existence of a ~~clear risk of a serious~~serious and persistent breach by Hungary of the common values of the Union as set out in Article 2 TEU;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 – indent 8

– to ~~update~~implement its 2003 communication on Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (COM(2003) 606) ~~and to draw up a detailed proposal for a swift and independent monitoring mechanism and an early warning system;~~

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 – indent 8 a (new)

- to draw up a detailed proposal for a swift and independent monitoring mechanism applying to all Member States, based on objective indicators developed on Article 2 TEU; an evaluation and early warning system; a list of proportionate and progressive measures and sanctions, including freezing or withdrawal of EU funds, to be taken in cases of clear risk of a serious breach, or existence of a serious and persistent breach, by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60 – indent 13

– to address these issues in the framework of the implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive in order to improve cooperation between regulatory bodies of the Member States and the Commission, bringing forward as soon as possible a ~~legislative proposal~~revision and aime~~d at reviewing Article 30 of that Directive~~ndment of the Directive and notably of its Articles 29 and 30;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Claude MORAES, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Josef WEIDENHOLZER, Boris ZALA, Hannu TAKKULA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61 – indent 20

– to take positive action and effective measures to ensure that the fundamental rights of all persons, including persons belonging to minorities, are respected;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68

68. Given the current institutional mechanism laid down in Article 7 TEU, reiterates the calls it made, in its resolution of 12 December 2012 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (2010- 2011), for the establishment of a new mechanism (~~‘Copenhagen high-level group’~~which could take the form of a strengthened Commission-FRA monitoring, evaluation and recommendation exercise and a strengthened Commission-Council- European Parliament-Member States dialogue on measures to be taken, a 'Copenhagen high-level group', a "wise men group" as precedently foreseen by the Treaties, an Article 70 TFEU evaluation, etc) to ensure compliance by all Member States with the common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69

69. ~~Reiterat~~Believes that the setting- up of such a mechanism cshould fully involve the ~~rethinking of the mandate of the~~ European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, which should ~~be enhanced to include regular monitoring of Member States' compliance with Article 2 of the TEU~~carry out horizontal and regular monitoring and evaluation of EU and Member States' compliance with Article 2 of the TEU; reiterates its request to review the mandate of the FRA to strengthen its competences and powers;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72

72. Instructs its committee responsible for the protection within the territory of the Union of citizens' rights, human rights and fundamental rights, and for determining clear risks of a serious breach by a Member State of the common principles, to submit a detailed proposal in the form of a report to the Conference of Presidents and to theCalls on the Council to act pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union, Rule 74e of the European Parliament Rules of Procedure and on the basis of the present detailed proposal and specific report to Plenary;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72 a (new)

72a. invites also Member States and the European Commission, pursuant to Article 7(1) TEU to take up their responsibilities and issue reasoned proposals for the Council in the view of the determination that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values referred to in Article 2, hear the Member State in question and address recommendations to it;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72 b (new)

72b. Instructs its committee responsible for the protection within the territory of the Union of citizens' rights, human rights and fundamental rights, and for determining clear risks of a serious breach by a Member State of the common principles, as well as its committee responsible for the determination of the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the principles common to the Member States, to follow up the developments of the situation in Hungary;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2130(INI)

Renate WEBER, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nils TORVALDS, Baroness Sarah LUDFORD, Gianni VATTIMO, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77

77. ~~Ask~~Calls the Co~~nference of Presidents to activate the mechanism laid down in~~mmission and Member States to activate Article 7(12) TEU ~~in case the replies from~~, shall the Hungarian authorities ~~to the above- mentioned recommendations do not comply with the requirements of Article 2 TEU~~fail to comply with the requirements of Article 2 TEU and with the above mentioned concerns and recommendations;

2013/05/29
Committee: LIBE

2012/2098(INI)

Rebecca TAYLOR, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that an obligation for systematic reporting on essential information on sustainability does not overburden companies as any new CSR strategy needs to be welcomed by companies; calls on the Commission to allow for a transition period before non- financial reporting on a regular basis comes into force for companies as this transition period would provide companies with the opportunity to first properly implement CSR internally, putting in place an accurate and detailed CSR policy as part of their internal management systems;

2012/11/30
Committee: JURI

2012/2098(INI)

Rebecca TAYLOR, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Acknowledges that many SMEs in Europe already undertake CSR policies, such as local employment, community engagement, applying good governance policies with their supply chain etc.; however, most of these SMEs do not know that they are actually putting in practice sustainability, CSR and good corporate governance practices; therefore calls on the Commission to first consider SMEs’ current practices before considering CSR strategies specifically for SMEs;

2012/11/30
Committee: JURI

2012/2032(INI)

Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nadja HIRSCH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Welcomes the Commission's commitment to performing a comprehensive evaluation of the Dublin system in 2014, reviewing its legal, economic, social and human rights effects; considers that further reflection is needed on the development of an equitable responsibility-sharing mechanism for determining which Member State should be responsible for processing asylum applications;

2012/06/07
Committee: LIBE

2012/2032(INI)

Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Stresses that the relevant case-law suspending transfers under the Dublin Regulation, while providing an answer to individual cases, fails to overcome the structural shortcomings of the Dublin system as a whole; welcomes, therefore, the efforts to include additional criteria in Dublin II in order to mitigate the system's unwanted adverse effects; believes that discussions for the determination of the Member State responsible must take account of the fact that some Member States are already facing disproportionate pressures and some asylum systems are partially or fully dysfunctional;

2012/06/07
Committee: LIBE

2012/2032(INI)

Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Raül ROMEVA i RUEDA, Nadja HIRSCH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31 a. Believes that special attention should be paid to assessing whether relocation efforts are undermined by the transfer of asylum seekers under the Dublin Regulation;

2012/06/07
Committee: LIBE

2012/2032(INI)

Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Welcomes the funding possibilities provided under the AMF for relocating asylum seekers, and encourages Member States to engage in voluntary initiatives, while fully respecting asylum seekers‘ rights and the need for their consent; calls on the Commission to investigate the feasibility of developing an EU system for relocating asylum seekers, and to submit a proposal for a viable and sustainable programme for the internal relocation of asylum seekers, such a programme could be applied as a solidarity measure in situations where the number of asylum seekers is disproportionally high in relation to the capacity of a Member State's asylum system, or in cases of emergencies;

2012/06/07
Committee: LIBE

2012/2032(INI)

Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Considers that a significant effect of a protection-sensitive application of visa policies would be a reduction in the numbers of asylum seekers subject to procedures under the Dublin II geographical distance and travel facilities, this in its turn would contribute to a more even distribution of asylum seekers and responsibility sharing;

2012/06/07
Committee: LIBE

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Believes that the commission should focus more on presenting actual legislative proposals as opposed to numerous framework documents listing measures that have already been awaited and often postponed for several years;

2012/06/27
Committee: JURI

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Believes that an increased use of regulations instead of directives to regulate important aspects of the internal market would reduce the problems caused by incorrect or fragmented implementation of EU directives in national legislation, in this respect also recalls that correlation tables should always be included in directives relating to the internal market;

2012/06/27
Committee: JURI

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Considers that digital books and audiobooks for download on the Internet, digital books and audiobooks on a different physical means of support and physical books and audiobooks should all benefit from the same preferential treatment with regards to reduced VAT- rates, in this respect welcomes the decision of France and Luxembourg to introduce the same VAT rate for all these types of books;

2012/06/27
Committee: JURI

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Calls on the commission, in the interest of non-discrimination of goods and services of a particular type, to urgently clarify that it will not bring any legal actions towards member states that decide to introduce the same reduced VAT rates for downloadable digital books and audiobooks as on comparable products on a different physical means of support and in this respect considers the intentions of the commission to come back with a proposal on this topic by the end of 2013 to be completely inadequate;

2012/06/27
Committee: JURI

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Looks forward to the prompt adoption by the Commission of the review of the European Trademark System as a this is a crucial building block for a well functioning internal market;

2012/06/27
Committee: JURI

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Regard~~Welcomes the Commission's proposal for mutual recognition of eIdentification and eAuthentication and for digital signatures with great interest;

2012/06/27
Committee: JURI

2012/2030(INI)

Nils TORVALDS, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Strongly supports measures both at a member state and a~~ctive campaign to prevent product~~t a European level to prevent the sales of counterfeit~~ing an~~ed product ~~piracy~~s on the Internet;

2012/06/27
Committee: JURI

2012/0366(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 29

(29) Council Directive 89/622/EEC of 13 November 1989 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the labelling of tobacco products and the prohibition of the marketing of certain types of tobacco for oral use prohibited the sale in the Member States of certain types of tobacco for oral use. Directive 2001/37/EC confirmed this prohibition. Article 151 of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden grants the Kingdom of Sweden derogation from this prohibition. ~~The prohibit~~Member States and regions of ~~the sale of oral tobacco should be maintained in order to prevent the introduction to the internal market of a product that is addictive, has adverse health effects and is attractive to young people~~Member States with a tradition of using oral tobacco shall have an opportunity to apply for a national or regional derogation from the prohibition on cultural or historical grounds. For other smokeless tobacco products that are not produced for the mass market, a strict labelling and ingredients regulation is considered sufficient to contain market expansion beyond their traditional use.

2013/06/13
Committee: JURI

2012/0366(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall prohibit the placing on the market of tobacco products with a characterising flavour, without prejudice to Article 151 of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden.

2013/06/13
Committee: JURI

2012/0366(COD)

Nils TORVALDS, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Each unit packet of tobacco products and any outside packaging shall carry health warnings in the official language or languages of the Member State where the product is placed on the market, without prejudice to Article 151 of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden.

2013/06/13
Committee: JURI

2012/0366(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1

Member States shall prohibit the placing on the market of tobacco for oral use, without prejudice to Article 151 of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden. Member States and regions of Member States with a tradition of using oral tobacco shall have an opportunity to apply for a national or regional derogation from the prohibition on cultural or historical grounds.

2013/06/13
Committee: JURI

2012/0360(COD)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) The provision of services other than statutory audit to audited entities by statutory auditors, audit firms or members of their networks may compromise their independence. Therefore, it is appropriate to require ~~the statutory auditor, the audit firm and the members of their network not to provide non-audit services to their audited entities. The provision of~~safeguards in the form of a prohibition of certain non- audit services by an audit firm to a company would prevent that audit firm from carrying out statutory audit of that company, thus resulting in a reduction of the audit firms available to provide statutory audit, in particular with regard to the audit of large public-interest entities where the market is concentrated. Asthe statutory auditor cannot perform to their audited entities, as well as result, in order to secure that a minimum number of audit firms is able to provide audit services to large public-interest entities, it is appropriate to request that audit firms of significant dimension focus their professional activity on the carrying out of statutory audit and are not allowed to undertake other services unconnected to their statutory audit function such as consultancy or advisory services- tendering, at the behest of the audit committee, of any non-audit service and financial audit related services above a 30% threshold.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Rebecca TAYLOR, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) Audit committees, or bodies performing an equivalent function within the audited entity, have a decisive role in contributing to high-quality statutory audit. It is particularly important to reinforce the independence and technical competence of the audit committee by requiring that a majority of its members is independent and that at least one member of the committee has competence in auditing and another one in auditing and/or accounting. Members of the audit committee should take part in skill enhancement programmes to ensure an appropriate level of technical knowledge to fulfil their roles. The Commission Recommendation of 15 February 2005 on the role of non- executive or supervisory directors of listed companies and on the committees of the (supervisory) board26 sets out how audit committees should be established and function. Considering, however, the dimension of boards in companies with reduced market capitalisation and in small and medium-sized public-interest entities, it would be appropriate that the functions assigned to the audit committee for those entities, or to a body performing equivalent functions within the audited entity, may be performed by the administrative or supervisory body as a whole. Public- interest entities which are UCITS or alternative investment funds should also be exempted from the obligation to have an audit committee. This exemption takes into account the fact that where those funds function merely for the purpose of pooling assets, the employment of an audit committee is not appropriate. UCITS and alternative investments funds, as well as their management companies, operate in a strictly defined regulatory environment and are subject to specific governance mechanisms such as controls exercised by their depositary.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) In order to address the familiarity threat and therefore reinforce the independence of auditors and audit firms, it is important to establish a maximum duration of the audit engagement of a statutory auditor or audit firm in a particular audited entity. AFurthermore, a comprehensive, transparent and independent evaluation of audit quality should be regularly and appropriately documented. This comprehensive assessment should form the basis for the annual auditor selection by the general assembly. The purpose of mandatory tendering for the audit engagement is to not only evaluate the incumbent provider's performance but also the requirements of the audited entity. Furthermore, an appropriate gradual rotation mechanism should also be established with regard to the most senior personnel involved in the statutory audit, including the key audit partners carrying out the statutory audit on behalf of the audit firm. It is also important to provide for an appropriate period within which such statutory auditor or audit firm may not carry out the statutory audit of the same entity. In order to ensure a smooth transition, the former auditor should transfer a handover file with relevant information to the incoming auditor.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)

(36a) The Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on specific requirements regarding statutory audit of public- interest entities envisages that the EU- wide cooperation between competent authorities in respect of the activities of statutory auditors and audit firms that audit the financial statements of public- interest entities would take place within ESMA. ESMA would thus take over the EU-wide cooperation mechanism that currently takes place under the aegis of the European Group of Auditors' Oversight Bodies (EGAOB), an expert group established and chaired by the European Commission. ESMA should create a standing committee composed of the competent authorities and supervisors of auditors. However, auditor public oversight would continue to be carried out at national level. ESMA would be best placed to fulfil the new tasks according to this Regulation in order to ensure an effective and operational cooperation at EU level. An EU-wide cooperation on auditor supervision within ESMA would benefit from the experience and resources of ESMA, as they are already working in the field of auditing regarding public-interest entities under the auspices of the Corporate Reporting Standing Committee. Under this new structure within ESMA, Member States will be sufficiently represented and will be an integral part of the decision-making process. The Commission, shall after a transitional period, report back to the European Parliament and the Council with a report on the function of ESMA regarding coordination of European audit supervision and their future role in this regard. The Commission shall evaluate ESMA has enough resources to fulfil its tasks laid down in this Regulation and propose budget increases if necessary.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

(ea) auditing technology systems and risk management procedures related to the preparation and/or control of financial information included in the financial statements and advice on risk;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)

(eb) audit of occupational pension schemes and pension obligations;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point f

(f) any other statutory duty related to audit work imposed by ~~Union legis~~law or regulation to the statutory auditor or audit firm.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

A statutory auditor or an audit firm carrying out statutory audit of public- interest entities shall not directly or indirectly provide to the audited entity, to its parent undertaking and to its controlled undertakings prohibited non-audit services.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Where the statutory auditor belongs to a network, no member of such network shall provide to the audited entity, to its parent undertaking and to its controlled undertakings within the Union any prohibited non- audit services.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – introductory part

For the purposes of this Article, prohibited non-audit services shall mean:

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point ii

(ii) bookkeeping services including the calculations of current and deferred taxes and preparing accounting records and financial statements as well as financial information;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point iii

(iii) designing ~~and~~or implementing internal control or, risk management ~~procedure~~or financial information technology systems related to the preparation ~~and/~~or control of financingal information included in the financial statements ~~and advice on risk~~;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point iv

(iv) valuation services~~, providing fairness opinions or contribution-in-kind reports~~;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point iv a (new)

(iva) generate information that is significant to the accounting records or financial statements that are subject to the statutory audit;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point vi

~~(vi) designing and implementing financial information technology systems for public-interest entities as referred to in Article 2(13)(b) to (j) of Directive 2006/43/EC;~~deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point vii a (new)

(viia) payroll services;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point viii a (new)

(viiia) human resources and/or recruitment services, including searching for and seeking out candidates for personnel positions within the audited entity;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point viii b (new)

(viiib) legal and tax services that go beyond the presentation of alternatives; tax services for natural persons with a significant role in the financial reporting of the audited entity and the marketing of tax planning concepts;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point viii c (new)

(viiic) promoting, dealing in, or underwriting client shares;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point a – point viii d (new)

(viiid) providing comfort letters for investors in the context of the issuance of an undertaking's securities;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3 – point b

(b) services which may entail conflict of interest: (i) human resources services, including recruiting senior management; (ii) providing comfort letters for investors in the context of the issuance of an undertaking's securities; (iii) designing and implementing financial information technology systems for public-interest entities as referred to in Article 2(13)(a) of Directive 2006/43/EC; (iv) due diligence services to the vendor or the buy side on potential mergers and acquisitions and providing assurance on the audited entity to other parties at a financial or corporate transaction.deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 4

By derogation from the first and second subparagraphs, the services mentioned in point (b)(iii) and (iv) may be provided by the statutory auditor or the audit firm, subject to prior approval by the competent authority referred to in Article 35(1).deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 5

By derogation from the first and second subparagraphs, the services mentioned in point (b)(i) and (ii) may be provided by the statutory auditor or the audit firm, subject to prior approval by the audit committee as referred to in Article 31 of this Regulation.deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5

5. Where an audit firm generates more than one third of its annual audit revenues from large public-interest entities and belongs to a network whose members have combined annual audit revenues which exceed EUR 1 500 million within the European Union, it shall comply with the following conditions: (a) it shall not directly or indirectly provide to any public interest entity non- audit services; (b) it shall not belong to a network which provides non-audit services within the Union; (c) any entity which provides the services listed in paragraph 3 shall not directly or indirectly hold more than 5 % of the capital or of the voting rights in the audit firm; (d) the entities which provide the services listed in paragraph 3shall not directly or indirectly hold together more than 10 % of the capital or of the voting rights in the audit firm; (e) such audit firm shall not directly or indirectly hold more than 5 % of the capital or of the voting rights in any entity which provides the services listed in paragraph 3.deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 a (new)

Article 10a Tender of non-audit services 1. Related financial audit services enumerated in Article 10 (2) that would increase the ratio of non-audit to audit fees to more than 30% and non-audit related services must be subject to an open and transparent tendering procedure, if the designated audit committee feels it is necessary. If the audit committee does not feel it is necessary, it should explain why to the competent authority. 2. The tendering procedure referred to in Paragraph 1 shall be designed by the audit committee and approved by the competent authority. When designing their non-audit service policies, audit committees must: (a) aim for the greatest possible transparency; (b) give due consideration to small and medium-sized service providers; (c) ensure involvement of shareholders in the provision of non-audit services, in particular the audit committee shall receive an annual approval of the audited entities policy for non-audit services. 3. The selection procedure for those non- audit services referred to in paragraph 1 shall respect the following criteria: (a) the audit committee shall be free to invite any statutory auditors, audit firms or non-audit service providers to submit proposals for the provision of non-audit services; (b) tender documents shall be prepared by the audit committee, which should contain transparent and non- discriminatory selection criteria that shall be used to evaluate the proposals made by statutory auditor(s), audit firm(s), or non- audit service provider(s); (c) where, in accordance with national Union law, the competent authorities referred to in Article 35, require statutory auditors, audit firms and non-audit service providers should comply with certain quality standards, those standards shall be included in the tender documents; (d) the audit committee shall evaluate the proposals made by the statutory auditors, audit firms or non-audit service providers in accordance with the selection criteria predefined in the tender documents; (e) the audit committee shall be able to demonstrate to the competent authority referred to in Article 35 that the selection procedure was conducted in a fair manner.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4

4. The audit report shall not be longer than four pages or 10000 characters (without spaces). It shall not contain any cross-references to the additional report to the audit committee referred to in Article 23.deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 – point e

(e) describe the distribution of tasks among the statutory auditor(s)s and/or the audit firm(s) and include a description of the scope and timing of the audit and significant findings from the statutory audit conducted. This should include any significant deficiencies in the internal control system of the audited entity; how they addressed significant difficulties encountered during the audit and other matters arising from the statutory audit that in the statutory auditor's or audit firm's professional judgment are significant to the financial reporting process;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)

Members of the audit committee shall take part in skill enhancement programmes in order to ensure an adequate technical knowledge level to fulfil their tasks.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

~~Unless it concerns the renewal of an audit engagement in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 33(1), t~~The recommendation of the audit committee referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, shall be prepared following a ~~selection~~tender procedure organizsed by the audited entity respecting the following criteria:

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a

(a) ~~the audited entity shall be free to invite~~ any statutory auditors or audit firms is free to submit proposals for the provision of the statutory audit service on the condition that Article 33(2) is respected and that at least one of the invited auditors or firms is not one who received more than 15% of the total audit fees from large public-interest entities in the Member State concerned in the previous calendar year;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c

(c) the audit~~ed entity~~ committee shall prepare tender documents to the intention of the invited statutory auditor(s) or audit firm(s). Those tender documents shall allow the audit firm to understand the business of the audited entity and the type of statutory audit that is to be carried out. The tender documents shall contain transparent and non- discriminatory selection criteria that shall be used by the audit~~ed entity~~ committee to evaluate the proposals made by statutory auditors or audit firms;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point d

(d) the audit~~ed entity~~ committee shall be free to define the selection procedure and may conduct direct negotiations with interested tenderers in the course of the procedure;

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point f

(f) the audit committeed entity shall ~~evaluate~~perform a comprehensive assessment of the proposals made by the statutory auditors or audit firms in accordance with the selection criteria predefined in the tender documents. The audited entity shall prepare a report on the conclusions of the selection procedure, which shall be validated by the audit committee. The audited entity and the audit committee shall take into consideration any inspection report on the applicant statutory auditor or audit firm referred to in Article 40(6) and published by the competent authority pursuant to Article 44(d);

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point g

(g) the audit~~ed entity~~ committee shall be able to demonstrate to the competent authority referred to in Article 35 that the selection procedure was conducted in a fair manner.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

~~The audit committee shall be responsible for the selection procedure referred to in the first subparagraph.~~deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

The public-interest entity may renew thise audit engagement only once, provided this is based on a proposal of the audit committee after a re-tendering process has taken place. Shareholders at the annual general meeting shall formally approve the statutory auditor(s) engagement.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

The maximum duration of the combined two engagements shall not exceed 614 years. At least one re-rendering process shall take place during this 14 year period.

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4

Where throughout a continuous engagement of 6 years two statutory auditors or audit firms have been appointed, the maximum duration of the engagement of each statutory auditor or audit firm shall not exceed 9 years.deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0359(COD)

Sharon BOWLES, Alexandra THEIN, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Rebecca TAYLOR, Jürgen CREUTZMANN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3

3. By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 2, on an exceptional basis the public-interest entity may request the competent authority referred to in Article 35(1) to grant an extension to re-appoint the statutory auditor or audit firm for an additional engagement. In case of appointment of two statutory auditors or audit firms, this third engagement shall not exceed three years. In case of appointment of one statutory auditor or audit firm, this third engagement shall not exceed two years.deleted

2012/11/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3

(3) Citizens should be able to exercise fully the rights deriving from the citizenship of the Union and from international Conventions that the Union has acceded to. They should be able to exercise their right to move and reside freely in the Union, their right to vote for and stand as a candidate in European Parliament and municipal elections, their right to consular protection and their right to petition the European Parliament. They should feel at ease about living, travelling and working in another Member State, trusting that their rights are protected, no matter where in the Union they happen to be.

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Michael CASHMAN, Kinga GÖNCZ, Ulrike LUNACEK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) Violence against women in all its forms constitutes a violation of fundamental rights and a serious health scourge. Such violence is present throughout the Union and coordinated action, building on the methods and results of the previous DAPHNE programmes, is necessary in order to address it. Taking action to combat violence against women contributes to the promotion of equality between women and men.

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) In line with the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the EU Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-20151, discrimination on the ground of sex should be understood to also include discrimination arising from the gender identity of a person. __________________ 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015 (COM(2010)0491).

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Michael CASHMAN, Kinga GÖNCZ, Ulrike LUNACEK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1

The general objective of the Programme shall be to contribute to the creation of an area, where the rights of persons, the principle of equality and non- discrimination, as enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ~~and~~, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, a~~re promoted and protec~~nd the international human rights conventions that the Union has acceded to, are promoted, protected and effectively implemented.

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) to promote and mainstream equality for all and the effective implementation of the principles of non discrimination on ~~the~~any grounds ofincluding sex, racial or ethnic origin, ~~religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, including equality between women and men and the rights of persons with disabilities and of the elder~~language, nationality or membership of a national minority, religion or belief, disability, age and sexual orientation equally;

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Michael CASHMAN, Kinga GÖNCZ, Ulrike LUNACEK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) to prevent and combat violence and hatred against any minority groups, in particular on the basis of their sex, racial or ethnic origin, language, nationality or membership of a national minority, religion or belief, disability, age and sexual orientation, and to promote tolerance and respect towards them;

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) to prevent and combat racism, xenophobia and other forms of intolerance;

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)

(bb) to promote, protect and monitor the rights of persons with disabilities;

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)

(da) assisting and supporting non- governmental organisations and other organisations operating in the relevant fields;

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) Analytical activities, such as regular collection of comparable data and statistics; development of common methodologies and, where appropriate, indicators or benchmarks; studies, researches, analyses and surveys; evaluations and impact assessments; elaboration and publication of guides, reports and educational material; monitoring and assessment of the transposition and application of Union legislation and of the implementation of Union policies; workshops, seminars, experts meetings, conferences;

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) Training activities, such as staff exchanges, workshops, seminars, train-the- trainers events, development of online/other training modules; these activities should include a gender dimension and an anti-discrimination perspective;

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) Support for main actors, such as support for Member States when implementing Union law and policies; support for key European level networks whose activities are linked to the implementation of the objectives of the Programme; support to the activities of non-governmental organisations pursuing the objectives of the programme; networking among specialised bodies and organisations, national, regional and local authorities at European level; funding of experts' networks; funding of European level observatories.

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2

2. In order to implement the Programme, the Commission shall adopt annual work programmes, which shall include activities regarding all the specific objectives of the Programme referred to in Article 4 and the actions referred to in Article 5, in the form of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 9(2).

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0344(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Appropriate and fair distribution of financial support between different areas covered by this Regulation shall be ensured, while considering the level of funding already allocated under the previous 2007-2013 programmes referred to in Article 13. When deciding on the allocation of funds to those areas in the annual work programmes, the Commission shall take into consideration the need to maintain sufficient levels for all areas referred to in Article 4(1).

2012/07/10
Committee: LIBE

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32

(32) In order to provide for enhanced transparency of payments made to governments, large undertakings and public interest entities ~~which are active in the extractive industry or logging of primary forests should disclose in a separate report on an annual basis~~should disclose, as part of their annual financial statements, material payments made to governments in the countries in which they operate. Such undertakings which are active in countries rich in natural resources, in particular minerals, oil, natural gas as well as primary forests~~. The report~~ should include in their annual financial statements types of payments comparable to those disclosed by an undertaking participating in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). The initiative is also complementary to the EU FLEGT Action Plan (Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade) and the Timber Regulation which require traders of timber products to exercise due diligence in order to prevent illegal wood from entering into the EU market.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33

(33) The ~~report~~disclosures should serve to facilitate governments of resource-rich countries in implementing the EITI Principles and Criteria, amongst other voluntary reporting standards, and account to their citizens for payments such governments receive from undertakings ~~active in the extractive industry or loggers of primary forests operating within their jurisdiction. The report should incorporate disclosures on a~~operating within their jurisdiction. The disclosures should be on a country-by- country and project-by-project basis, where a project is considered as the lowest level of operational reporting unit at which the undertaking prepares regular internal management reports, such as a concession, geographical basin, etc and where payments have been attributed to such projects. In the light of the overall objective of promoting good governance in these countries, the materiality of payments to be reported should be assessed in relation to the recipient government. Various criteria on materiality could be envisaged such as payments of an absolute amount, or a percentage threshold (such as payments in excess of a percentage of a country's GDP) and these can be defined through a delegated act, such as a contract, license, lease or other legal agreement under which an undertaking operates, which give rise to specific liabilities and where payments have been attributed to such projects, if any one payment or set of payments of the same type amount to more than 100 000 EUR. The reporting regime should be subject to a review and a report by the Commission within ~~fiv~~three years of the entry into force of the Directive. The review should consider the effectiveness of the regime and take into account international developments including issues of competitiveness and energy security. The review should also take into account the experience of preparers and users of the payments information and consider whether it would be appropriate to include additional ~~payment~~financial information ~~such as effective tax rates~~ and recipient details, such as bank account information.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35

(35) In order to take account of future changes to the laws of the Member States and in the legislation of the Union concerning company types, the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty in respect of updating the lists of undertakings contained in Annexes I and II. The use of delegated acts is also necessary to adapt the undertaking size criteria, as with the passage of time inflation will erode their real value. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. In order to ensure a relevant and appropriate level of disclosure of payments to governments by the extractive industry and loggers of primary forests and to ensure uniform application of this Directive, the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty in respect of the specification of the concept of materiality of payments.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – paragraph 1

1. ‘Undertaking active in the extractive industry’ means an undertaking with any activity involving the exploration, discovery, development, and extraction of minerals, oil and natural gas deposits, as referred to in Section B-Divisions 05 to 08 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council.deleted

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – paragraph 2

2. ‘Undertaking active in the logging of primary forests’ means an undertaking with activities as referred to in Section A- Division 2.2 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in primary forests.deleted

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall require large undertakings and all public interest entities ~~active in the extractive industry or the logging of primary forests~~ to prepare and make public a report on payments made to governments ~~on an annual basi~~as part of their annual financial statements.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. The following types of payments and information shall be reported:

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) taxes ~~on profits~~, levies and administrative fees, as well as the effective rate applied;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

(ba) profit before tax;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

(ca) quantities produced;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)

(ea) total number of people employed;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)

(eb) employees aggregate remuneration;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)

(fa) payments for having broken the law, such as environmental and remediation liabilities;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point f b (new)

(fb) payments to government security forces;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2 – point f c (new)

(fc) expenditure on fixed asset investment;

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Payments shall be disclosed if any one payment or set of payments of the same type amount to more than EUR 100 000.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 4

~~4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt~~ delegated ~~acts in accordance with Article 42 in order to specify the concept of materiality of payments.~~

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 5

5. The report shall exclude any type of payments made to a government in a country where the public disclosure of this type of payment is clearly prohibited by the criminal legislation of that country. In such cases the undertaking shall state that it has not reported payments in accordance with paragraphs 1 to 3, and shall disclose the name of the government concerned.deleted

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0308(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 39 – paragraph 1

1. A Member State shall require any large undertaking or any public interest entity ~~active in the extractive industry or the logging of primary forests and~~ governed by its national law to draw up a consolidated report on payments to governments in accordance with Articles 37 and 38 if that parent undertaking is under the obligation to prepare consolidated financial statements as laid down in Article 23(1) to 23(6) of this Directive.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0307(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) In order to provide for enhanced transparency of payments made to governments, issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market and which have activities in the extractive or logging of primary forest industries should disclose in a separate report on an annual basis payments made to governments in the countries in which they operate. The reportshould disclose as part of their annual financial statements payments made to governments in the countries in which they operate. In the case of issuers engaged in activities related to extractive or forest industries, disclosures should include types of payments comparable to those disclosed under the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), a~~nd provide civil society with information to hold governments of resource-rich countries to~~mongst other reporting standards. For all issuers, disclosures should be on ac count for their receipts from the exploitation of natural resources. The initiative is also complementary to the EU FLEGT Action Plan (Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade) and the Timber Regulation, which require traders of timberry-by- country and project-by-project basis, where a project means a contract, licence, lease or other legal agreement under which an undertaking operates, which gives rise to specific revenue liabilities and where payments have been attributed to such produjects ~~to exercise due diligence in order to prevent illegal wood from entering into the EU market~~, if any one payment or set of payments of the same type amount to more than EUR 100 000. The detailed requirements are defined in Chapter 9 of Directive 2011/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0307(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 10

(10) A harmonised regime for notification of major holdings of voting rights, especially regarding aggregation of holdings of shares with holdings of financial instruments, should improve legal certainty, enhance transparency and reduce administrative burden for cross-border investors. Member States should therefore not be allowed to adopt stricter or divergent rules in that area than those provided in Directive 2004/109/EC. However, taking into account the existing differences in ownership concentration in the Union, Member States should continue to be allowed to set lower thresholds for notification of holdings of voting rights; nevertheless, measures to incentivise long term investment should be considered and also a requirement for full transparency of voting for any borrowed shares.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0307(COD)

Kinga GÖNCZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 5

Member States shall require all issuers ~~active in the extractive or logging of primary forest industries, as defined in […]~~ to prepare, in accordance with Chapter 9 of Directive 2011/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, a ~~report~~disclosure onf payments made to governments ~~on an annual basi~~as part of their annual financial statements. The report shall be made public at the latest six months after the end of each financial year and shall remain publicly available for at least five years. Payments to governments shall be reported at consolidated level.

2012/05/09
Committee: JURI

2011/0177(APP)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Welcomes the proposal for the Rights and Citizenships Programme ~~and underlines the need for a clear European added value of the funded activitie~~; emphasises that the simplification of the funding structure should not result in a decrease in the level of financial resources compared to the level available in the current 2007-2013 programmes; calls for an increased budget to promote and protect fundamental rights, to combat racism, xenophobia and all forms of discrimination, especially in the context of the growing intolerance and social unrest experienced in Europe as a consequence of the current financial crisis;

2012/07/17
Committee: LIBE

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2

~~2. Member States shall ensure that any statement made by such person before he is made aware that he is a suspect or an accused person may not be used against him.~~deleted

2011/11/17
Committee: JURI

2011/0154(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3

3. Member States shall ensure that statements made by the suspect or accused person or evidence obtained in breach of his right to a lawyer or in cases where a derogation to this right was authorised in accordance with Article 8, may not be used at any stage of the procedure as evidence against him, unless the use of such evidence would not prejudice the rights of the defence.deleted

2011/11/17
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Title

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on entrusting the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) with certain tasks related to the protection of intellectual property rights, including the assembling of public and private sector representatives as a European Observatory on ~~Counterfeiting and Piracy~~Intellectual Property Rights

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) The ~~constant rise~~high level of infringements of intellectual property rights constitutes a genuine threat not only to the Union economy, but also in many cases to the health and safety of Union consumers. Therefore, effective, immediate and coordinated actions at European and global levels are needed to successfully combat this phenomenon.

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) In the context of the overall intellectual property rights strategy foreseen by the Council Resolution of 25 September 2008 on a comprehensive European anti- counterfeiting and anti-piracy plan , the Council called on the Commission to launch a European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy ~~(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Observatory’)~~. The Commission therefore formed a network of experts from the public and the private sectors and described its tasks in the Communication ‘Enhancing the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the internal market’. This Regulation changes the name of the Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy to the Observatory on Intellectual Property Rights (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Observatory’).

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Assembled by the Office, the Observatory should become a centre of excellence on information and data related to ~~infringements of~~ intellectual property rights, by benefiting from the Office's expertise, experience and resources. The Observatory should have access to a pool of experienced academic experts from relevant disciplines that can assist it in the performance of its duties.

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) The Office should offer a forum that brings together public authorities and the private sector, ensuring the collection, analysis and dissemination of relevant objective, comparable and reliable data regarding the value of intellectual property rights and the infringements of those rights, the development of best practices and strategies to protect intellectual property rights~~, and~~ which will rais~~ing~~e public awareness of the impacts of intellectual property rights infringements. Furthermore, the Office should fulfil additional tasks, such as to evaluate measures to improve the understanding of the value of intellectual property rights, enhance the expertise of persons involved in the enforcement of intellectual property rights by appropriate training measures, increase knowledge on techniques to prevent counterfeiting, and improve cooperation with third countries and international organisations.

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18

(18) With regard to representatives of the private sector, the Office should involve, when assembling the Observatory in the context of its activities, a representative selection of the economic sectors most concerned by and most experienced in the fight against infringements as well as the valorisation of intellectual property rights, in particular representatives of right holders and Internet service providers. Also, a proper representation of consumers and of small and medium -sized enterprises should be ensured.

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1

This Regulation entrusts the Office for Harmonizsation in the Internal Market (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Office’) with certain tasks related to the protection of intellectual property rights. In carrying out these tasks the Office shall regularly invite experts, authorities and stakeholders which will assemble under the name ‘European Observatory on ~~Counterfeiting and Piracy~~Intellectual Property Rights’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Observatory’).

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) improving the understanding on the scope and impact of infringements of intellectual property rights, protected under European Union law or the national laws of the Member States, including industrial property rights, copyright and rights related to copyright;deleted

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) improving the understanding on the value of intellectual property;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)

(ab) improving the understanding on the scope and impact of infringements of intellectual property rights protected under Union law or the national laws of the Member States, including industrial property rights, copyright and rights relating to copyright;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

~~(b) improving the understanding on the value of intellectual property;~~deleted

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) evaluating best practices with a view to ensuring that small and medium-sized enterprises, natural persons, non-profit organisations and universities can make effective use of intellectual property rights;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) enhancing the knowledge on best public and private sector practices to protect and valorise intellectual property rights within a well functioning internal market;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) evaluating best practices with regard to methods of raising citizens' awareness of the impact of infringements of intellectual property rights;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e

(e) enhancing the expertise of persons involved in the enforcement and valorisation of intellectual property rights;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point f

(f) enhancing the knowledge on technical tools to prevent ~~and combat counterfeiting and piracy~~infringements of intellectual property rights, including tracking and tracing systems;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point e

(e) providing regular assessments and specific reports by economic sector, geographic area and type of intellectual property right infringed, which evaluate, inter alia, the impact of intellectual property rights infringements on society, economy, health, environment, safety and security, and the relation of such infringements with organized crime ~~and terrorism~~;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point g

(g) drawing up reports and publications to raise awareness of the Union's citizens of the ~~impact of infringements~~value of intellectual property rights, and ~~organising conferences, on-line and off-line campaigns, events and meeting~~the impact of infringements of those rights, and organising conferences at European and international levels;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point j

(j) ~~researching,~~ evaluating and promoting technical tools for professionals and benchmark techniques, including tracking and tracing systems which help to distinguish genuine from counterfeit products;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point l

(l) building strategies in cooperation with the central industrial property offices of the Member States, including the Benelux Office for Intellectual Property, and developing techniques, skills and tools related to the protection of intellectual property rights, including training programmes ~~and awareness campaigns~~;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point n

(n) making recommendations to the Commission on issues falling within the scope of this Regulation, ~~including~~ on the basis of a request from ~~the Commiss~~one or more of the Union institutions;

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)

Article 2a Panel of academic experts The Observatory shall assemble a pool of academic experts within relevant academic fields to assist the Observatory in the tasks and activities set out in Article 2.

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

The Office shall publish a clear and objective list of criteria for stakeholder participation in the work of the Observatory.

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0135(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – point e

(e) ~~recommendations on the future policie~~assessments of policy options in the area of the protection and valorisation of intellectual property rights, including on how to enhance an effective cooperation between Member States.

2011/12/01
Committee: JURI

2011/0130(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1

1. A party who wishes to invoke in another Member State a protection order recognised pursuant to this Article shall notify the competent authority of the Member State of origin, which shall then provide the competent authorities of the Member State of recognition with the certificate issued in accordance with this Article.

2012/04/13
Committee: JURI FEMM

2011/0130(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The competent authority in the Member State of recognition shall inform the competent authority in the Member State of origin how the protection measure will be implemented. The competent authority in the Member State of origin shall then inform the parties affected by the measure how it will be implemented in the Member State of recognition.

2012/04/13
Committee: JURI FEMM

2011/0130(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2

2. If the protection measure is suspended or withdrawn in the Member State of origin, the competent authority of the Member State of ~~recognition shall, on application by the person causing the risk,~~origin shall notify this to the competent authority of the Member State of recognition, which shall then suspend or withdraw the recognition and, when applied, the enforcement of the protection measure. ~~The application shall be submitted using the form set out in Annex II.~~

2012/04/13
Committee: JURI FEMM

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) The participating Member States should give the European Patent Office certain administrative tasks relating to European patents with unitary effect, in particular as regards administration of requests for unitary effect, the registration of unitary effect and of any limitation, licence, transfer, revocation or lapse of European patents with unitary effect, the collection and redistribution of renewal fees, the publication of translations for information purposes during a transitional period and the administration of a compensation scheme of translation costs for applicants filing European patent applications in a language other than one of the official languages of the European Patent Office. The participating Member States should ensure that requests for unitary effect are filed with the European Patent Office within onthree months of the date of the publication of the mention of the grant in the European Patent Bulletin and that they are submitted in the language of the proceedings before the European Patent Office together with the translation prescribed for, during a transitional period, by Council Regulation…/… [translation arrangements].

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Patent proprietors should pay one common annual renewal fee for European patents with unitary effect. Renewal fees should be progressive throughout the term of the patent protection and, together with the fees to be paid to the European Patent Organisation during the pre-grant stage, should cover all costs associated with the grant of the European patent and the administration of the unitary patent protection. The level of the renewal fees should be fixed with the aim of facilitating innovation and fostering the competitiveness of European businesses and should take into account the specific situation of small and medium-sized enterprises, natural persons and non- profit organisations in the form of lower fees. It should also reflect the size of the market covered by the patent and be similar to the level of the national renewal fees for an average European patent taking effect in the participating Member States at the time where the level of the renewal fees is first fixed ~~by the Commission~~.

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) An Enhanced partnership between the European Patent Office and central industrial property offices of the Member States should enable the European Patent Office to make regular use, where appropriate, of the result of any search carried out by central industrial property offices on a national patent application the priority of which is claimed in a subsequent European patent application. All central industrial property offices, including those which do not perform searches in the course of a national patent granting procedure, can have an essential role under the enhanced partnership, inter alia by giving advice and support to potential patent applicants, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises, natural persons and non-profit organisations by receiving applications, by forwarding applications to the European Patent Office and by disseminating patent information.

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6

Right to prevent the direct use of the The European patent with unitary effect shall confer on its proprietor the right to prevent any third party not having the proprietor’s consent from the following: (a) making, offering, placing on the market or using a product which is the subject matter of the patent, or importing or storing the product for those purposes; (b) using a process which is the subject matter of the patent or, where the third party knows, or should have known, that the use of the process is prohibited without the consent of the proprietor of the patent, from offering the process for use within the participating Member States; (c) offering, placing on the market, using, importing or storing for those purposes a product obtained directly by a process which is the subject matter of the patent.Article 6 deleted invention

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7

Right to prevent the indirect use of the 1. The European patent with unitary effect shall confer on its proprietor the right to prevent any third party from supplying or offering to supply within the participating Member States any person without the proprietor’s consent, other than a party entitled to exploit the patented invention, with means, relating to an essential element of that invention, for putting it into effect therein, when the third party knows, or should have known, that those means are suitable and intended for putting that invention into effect. 2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply when the means are staple commercial products, except where the third party induces the person supplied to perform any of the acts prohibited by Article 6. 3. Persons performing the acts referred to in Article 8(a) to (d) shall not be considered to be parties entitled to exploit the invention within the meaning of paragraph 1.Article 7 deleted invention

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8

Limitation of the effects of the European The rights conferred by the European patent with unitary effect shall not extend to any of the following: (a) acts done privately and for non- commercial purposes; (b) acts done for experimental purposes relating to the subject matter of the patented invention; (c) acts carried out solely for the purpose of conducting the necessary tests and trials in accordance with Article 13(6) of Directive 2001/82/EC or Article 10(6) of Directive 2001/83/EC in respect of any patent covering the product within the meaning of either of those Directives; (d) the extemporaneous preparation for individual cases in a pharmacy of a medicine in accordance with a medical prescription nor acts concerning the medicine so prepared; (e) the use on board vessels of countries other than participating Member States of the patented invention, in the body of the vessel, in the machinery, tackle, gear and other accessories, when such vessels temporarily or accidentally enter the waters of participating Member States, provided that the invention is used there exclusively for the needs of the vessel; (f) the use of the patented invention in the construction or operation of aircraft or land vehicles or other means of transport of States other than participating Member States, or of accessories to such aircraft or land vehicles, when these temporarily or accidentally enter participating Member States; (g) the acts specified in Article 27 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation of 7 December 1944 , where these acts concern the aircraft of a country other than a participating Member State; (h) acts as covered by the farmers privilege pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No. 2100/94 which applies mutatis mutandis; (i) the use by a farmer of protected livestock for farming purposes, on condition that the breeding animals or other animal reproductive material were sold or otherwise commercialised to the farmer by the patent proprietor or with his/her consent. Such use includes the provision of the animal or other animal reproductive material for the purposes of his/her agricultural activity, but not the sale in the framework of or for the purpose of commercial reproductive activity; (j) the acts and the use of the obtained information as allowed under Articles 5 and 6 of Council Directive 91/250/EEC , in particular, by its provisions on decompilation and interoperability; and (k) the acts allowed pursuant to Article 10 of Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council .Article 8 deleted patent with unitary effect

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Diana WALLIS, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9

Exhaustion of the rights conferred by the European patent with unitary effect The rights conferred by a European patent with unitary effect shall not extend to acts concerning the product covered by that patent which are carried out within the territories of the participating Member States after that product has been put on the market in the Union by the proprietor of the patent or with his/her consent, unless there are legitimate grounds for the proprietor to oppose further commercialisation of the product.Article 9 deleted

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4 a (new)

(4a) The application of this Article shall not prejudice the application of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)1 and Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II)2. ____________________ 1 OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p. 6. 2 OJ L 199, 31.7.2007, p. 40.

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

For the purposes of point a), the participating Member States shall ensure that requests by the patent proprietor for unitary effect for a European patent are filed in the language of the proceedings as defined in Article 14(3) of the EPC no later than onthree months after the mention of the grant is published in the European Patent Bulletin.

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0093(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

(ba) taking into account the specific situation of small and medium-sized enterprises, natural persons and non- profit organisations in the form of lower fees,

2011/10/27
Committee: JURI

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Gérard DEPREZ, Petr JEŽEK

Proposal for a directive
Recital 5

(5) PNR data ~~are necessary~~may be useful to effectively prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute terrorist offences and serious crime and thus enhance internal security.

2012/04/03
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Title 1

Proposal for a ~~DIRECTIVE~~REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on the use of Passenger Name Record data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious ~~crime~~transnational crime (If adopted, changes apply throughout the text.)

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Citation 1

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 16, 82(1)(d) and 87(2)(a) thereof,

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Citation 1 a (new)

Having regard to Articles 7, 8 and 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ

Proposal for a directive
Recital 6

(6) PNR data may help law enforcement authorities prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute serious crimes, including acts of terrorism, by comparing them with various databases of persons and objects sought, to construct evidence and, where relevant, to find associates of criminals and unravel criminal networks.

2012/04/03
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)

(13a) PNR data should be transferred to a single designated unit (Passenger Information Unit) at EU level, so as to ensure clarity and reduce costs to air carriers.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Recital 14

(14) The contents of any lists of required PNR data to be obtained by the Passenger Information Unit should be drawn up with the objective of reflecting the legitimate requirements of public authorities to prevent, detect, investigate and prosecute terrorist offences or serious transnational crime, thereby improving internal security within the Union as well as protecting the fundamental rights of citizens, notably privacy and the protection of personal data~~. Such lists should not contain any personal data that could reveal racial or ethnic origin, political opinions~~, by applying high standards in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, Convention 108, and the European Convention for Human Rights. Such lists should not contain any personal data that could reveal a person's sex, race, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religious or philosophical beliefs, political opinion, trade union membership ~~or data concerning health or sexual life of the individual concerned~~, membership of a national minority, health or sexual orientation. The PNR data should contain details on the passenger’s reservation and travel itinerary which enable competent authorities to identify air passengers representing a threat to internal security.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Recital 19

(19) Taking fully into consideration the right to the protection of personal data and the right to non-discrimination, no decision that produces an adverse legal effect on a person or seriously affects him/her should be taken only by reason of the automated processing of PNR data. Moreover, no such decision should be taken ~~by reason~~on grounds of a person’s sex, race or, ethnic or~~igin~~ social origin, genetic features, language, religious or philosophical belief, political opinion, trade union membership, ~~health or sexual life.~~ membership of a national minority, health or sexual orientation, as laid down in Article 21 of Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Recital 21

(21) The period during which PNR data are to be retained should be necessary and proportionate to the purposes of the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious ~~crime. Because of the nature of the data and their uses, it is necessary that the PNR data are retained for a sufficiently long period for carrying out analysis and for use in investigations~~transnational crime. In order to avoid disproportionate use, it is necessary that~~, after an initial period, the data are anonymised~~ the data are masked-out immediately, and only accessible under very strict and limited conditions.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Recital 23

(23) The processing of PNR data domestically in each Member State by the Passenger Information Unit and by competent authorities should be subject to a standard of protection of personal data under their national law which is in line with Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters41 (‘Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA’)the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of xx/xx/201x on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and the free movement of such data, and with the high level of protection offered in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Convention 108, and the European Convention for Human Rights. __________________ 41 OJ L 350, 30.12.2008, p. 60.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) ‘international flight’ means any scheduled or non-scheduled flight by an air carrier planned to land on the territory of a Member State originating in a third country or to depart from the territory of a Member State with a final destination in a third country~~, including in both cases any transfer or transit flights~~;

2012/03/28
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK

Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 a (new)

(34a) The result of the processing of PNR data should in no circumstances be used by Member States as a ground to circumvent their international obligations under the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees and its 1967 Protocol and should not be used to deny asylum seekers to have safe and effective legal avenues to the EU territory to exercise their right to international protection;

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Louis MICHEL, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i – introductory part

(i) ‘serious transnational crime’ means the following offences under national law ~~referred to in Article 2(2) of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA if they are punishable by a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years~~: - participation in a criminal organisation, - terrorism, - trafficking in human beings, - sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, - illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, - illicit trafficking in weapons, munitions and explosives, - corruption, - fraud and tax evasion, - laundering of the proceeds of crime, - counterfeiting currency, including of the euro, - computer-related crime, - environmental crime, including illicit trafficking in endangered animal species and in endangered plant species and varieties, - murder, grievous bodily injury, - illicit trade in human organs and tissue, - rape - kidnapping, illegal restraint and hostage-taking, - child abduction and child abduction by parents, - organised or armed robbery, - illicit trafficking in cultural goods, including antiques and works of art, - illicit trafficking of mineral ore, - forgery of means of payment, - illicit trafficking in hormonal substances and other growth promoters, - illicit trafficking in nuclear or radioactive materials, - crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, if they are punishable under the national law of athe Member State~~, and if :~~ with a custodial sentence or a detention order for a maximum period of at least three years, and if;

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)

The list of serious transnational crime offences of Article 2(1) sub i shall be reviewed and adjusted accordingly as part of the overall review of this Directive.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Gérard DEPREZ, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Louis MICHEL, Petr JEŽEK

Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. The Commission shall set up a 'Passenger Information Unit' responsible for collecting PNR data from the air carriers, storing them, analysing them and transmitting the result of the analysis to the competent authorities referred to in Article 5. Its staff members may be seconded from Member States' competent public authorities.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Fredrick FEDERLEY, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Without prejudice to Article 7(4), the PNR data shall not be transmitted by the Passenger Information Unit to any other authority in any way or format to allow for assessment of the PNR data outside the Passenger Information Unit. The PNR data cannot be requested by other authorities on the basis of an order of a competent court or judicial body.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 8

~~(8) Frequent flyer information~~deleted

2012/03/28
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 11

~~(11) Split/divided PNR information~~deleted

2012/03/28
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 12

(12) ~~General remarks (including all available i~~Information on unaccompanied minors under 18 years, such as name and gender of the minor, age, language(s) spoken, name and contact details of guardian on departure and relationship to the minor, name and contact details of guardian on arrival and relationship to the minor, departure and arrival agent)

2012/03/28
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Louis MICHEL, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Petr JEŽEK

Proposal for a directive
Annex 1 – point 14

~~(14) Seat number and other seat information~~deleted

2012/03/28
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that, with regard to persons identified by a Passenger Information Unit in accordance with Article 4(2)~~(a) and (b)~~, the result of the processing of PNR data is proactively, and automatically, transmitted by that Passenger Information Unit to the Passenger Information Units of other Member States where the former Passenger Information Unit considers such transfer to be necessary for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious crime. The Passenger Information Units of othe ~~receiving~~r Member States ~~shall transmit such PNR data or the result of the processing of PNR data to their relevant competent authorities~~without delay.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Member States shall ensure that the Passenger Information Unit proactively informs the Passenger Information Units of other Member States in case PNR data has been requested in cases of a specific, actual and imminent threat on the basis of Article 7(3), Article 7(4) or Article 7(5).

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. The Passenger Information Unit shall ensure that, with regard to persons identified in accordance with Article 4(2), the result of the processing of PNR data is transmitted to any Member States' competent authorities where the Passenger Information Unit considers such transfer to be necessary for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious crime.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2

2. The Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request, if necessary, the Passenger Information Unit of any other Member State to provide it with PNR data that are kept in the latter’s database in accordance with Article 9(1), and, if necessary, also the result of the processing of PNR data. The request for such data may be based on any one or a combination of data elements, as deemed necessary by the requesting Passenger Information Unit for a specific case of prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious crime. Passenger Information Units shall provide the requested data as soon as practicable and shall provide also the result of the processing of PNR data, if it has already been prepared pursuant to Article 4(2)(a) and (b).deleted

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request, on a case-by-case basis if necessary and proportionate, the Passenger Information Unit of any other Member State to provide it with PNR data of targeted flights or specific individuals that are kept in the latter's database in accordance with Article 9(2). Passenger Information Units shall provide the requested data without delay. Where appropriate, an alert shall be entered in accordance with Article 36 of Regulation 1987/2006 on the Schengen Information System.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3

3. The Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request, if necessary, the Passenger Information Unit of any other Member State to provide it with PNR data that are kept in the latter’s database in accordance with Article 9(2), and, if necessary, also the result of the processing of PNR data. The Passenger Information Unit may request access to specific PNR data kept by the Passenger Information Unit of another Member State in their full form without the masking out only in exceptional circumstances in response to a specific threat or a specific investigation or prosecution related to terrorist offences or serious crime.deleted

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. The Passenger Information Unit may request access to specific identifiable PNR data kept by the Passenger Information Unit of another Member State on the basis of Article 4(2) point cb (new) in their full form without the masking out only in exceptional circumstances in response to a specific, actual and imminent threat related to terrorist offences or serious transnational crime. Such requests shall be logged and shall be subject to ex-post judicial review within 48 hours.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Only in those cases where it is necessary for the prevention of a specific, actual and imminent threat to public security may the competent authorities of a Member State request directly the Passenger Information Unit to provide it with PNR data that are kept in the latter's database in accordance with Article 9(2). Such requests shall relate to a specific investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences or serious transnational crime and shall be reasoned. The Passenger Information Unit shall respond to such requests as a matter of priority. Such requests shall be logged and shall be subject to ex-post judicial review within 48 hours.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5

5. Exceptionally, where early access is necessary to respond to a specific and actual threat related to terrorist offences or serious crime, the Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request the Passenger Information Unit of another Member State to provide it with PNR data of flights landing in or departing from the latter’s territory at any time.deleted

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Exceptionally, where early access is necessary to respond to a specific, actual and imminent threat related to terrorist offences or serious transnational crime, the Passenger Information Unit of a Member State shall have the right to request the Passenger Information Unit of another Member State to provide it with PNR data of flights landing in or departing from the latter's territory at any time. Such requests shall be logged and shall be subject to ex-post judicial review within 48 hours.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

2011/0023(COD)

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Nathalie GRIESBECK

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Exchange of information under this Article may take place using any existing channels for international law enforcement cooperation. The language used for the request and the exchange of information shall be the one applicable to the channel used.

2015/04/20
Committee: LIBE

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

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on Member States to take concrete action to inform their citizens about the historical and current situation of the Roma using amongst other things the reports from FRA as a source of material for this purpose;

2010/12/16
Committee: EMPL

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(2010)0312.

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to ~~establish a special body to~~ monitor Member States‘ performance in absorbing EU funds, and also calls urgently for the collection of data, taking into consideration the data protection directives, on the effectiveness of EU funds, in order to develop evidence- based policies;

2010/12/16
Committee: EMPL

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas ~~non-discrimination - although indispensable - is not by itself enough~~it is a duty for the EU and for its Member States to ensure the full respect, protection and promotion of fundamental rights, equality and non- discrimination, the right to free movement for all citizens, including for the Roma; whereas this is a necessary and fundamental precondition to successfully take measures to overcome the historic disadvantages of the Roma, and ~~whereas it is therefore necessary to complement equality legislation and policies~~fight discriminations they encounter; whereas it is necessary to ensure the full and non- discriminatory application of legislation and policies and mechanisms to monitor and sanction violations of the rights of Romas shall be strengthened for this aim, whereas these measures must be complemented and reinforced by addressing the specific needs of the Roma regarding the fulfilment of and ~~access to~~enjoyment of their human rights, including access to employment, housing, healthcare and education by means of an EU-level strategy,

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls for the setting up of EU Development bodies with local decision- making power in Member States with large Roma communities in order to secure development-oriented EU funding in support of good local initiatives;deleted

2010/12/16
Committee: EMPL

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas discriminations, evictions, expulsions, persecutions, segregation, racist speeches inciting to hate by political and governmental leaders, fingerprinting and ethnic profiling, inter alia, still occur on the EU territory and whereas the EU shall address these issues in the framework of the EU Strategy on Roma Inclusion by ensuring a stronger implementation of the directives on free movement, on discrimination based on race or ethnicity, on data protection, as well as of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, in cooperation with the Member States and with the support of the Fundamental Rights Agency, the Council of Europe and NGOs,

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas the chances of the Roma accessing the same rights and obligations as citizens of a Member State are largely dependant on their being provided with legal documentation of citizenship,

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1

– fundamental rights, equality and non- discrimination ~~and human rights~~, free movement, racism and xenophobia,

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Underlines that the EU Strategy on Roma inclusion shall also include measures to ensure the monitoring of the situation of Roma in relation to the respect and promotion of their fundamental rights, equality, non- discrimination and free movement in the EU;

2010/12/16
Committee: EMPL

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Restates its position that discriminatory expulsions targeting Roma are contrary to EU law and values and calls the Commission to take action as promised, including on other cases where violations of the rights of Roma have taken place, as denounced by NGOs to the Commission and the EP;

2010/12/16
Committee: EMPL

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 c (new)

15c. Calls the Commission to include in the framework of the EU Strategy on Roma the proper application of Council Directives 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin and 2004/38/EC 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 States to protect Roma from discriminations and associate the Fundamental Rights Agency in the implementation of the strategy;

2010/12/16
Committee: EMPL

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 1

– ~~anti-discrimination measures~~measures to guarantee, protect and promote fundamental rights (implementation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and related jurisprudence, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights provisions), equality and non-discrimination (implementation of the Racial Equality Directive), right to free movement (implementation of the free movement directive without discriminations) and awareness-raising,

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point b – indent 2

– combating prejudices, stereotypes, racism and anti- gypsyism, notably by ensuring full implementation of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia,

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – indent 12 a (new)

- situations of serious violations of human rights, discrimination, evictions, expulsions, racism, targeting of the Roma population by local or regional authorities or third parties;

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls on Member States to conduct awareness-raising programs both within the Roma minority and among the relevant administrative bodies in order to ensure that legal documentation of citizenship is provided to all those who fulfil the national requirements of citizenship;

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Stresses the importance for Member States to sign and ratify the European Convention of Nationality that clearly states that no discrimination shall exist in a states' internal nationality law on the grounds of sex, religion, national or ethnic origin;

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2276(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls for the inclusion in the Strategy of a mechanism of cooperation, exchange of information and monitoring, not only at EU but also at national level, together with the Fundamental Rights Agency, the Council of Europe, other relevant international and European institutions, NGOs, Roma communities, other stakeholders, in order to address problems and find solutions and to ensure that the Strategy is correctly and fully implemented both at EU and national level by those responsible for it, thereby ensuring the success of the Strategy;

2011/01/17
Committee: LIBE

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas territoriality poses more and more impediments to the development of online services as content providers aiming at offering creative works to the entire EU market need to clear rights in each of the 27 Member States,

2011/02/07
Committee: JURI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas territorial obstacles mean that consumers interested in a cross- border access to creative content face considerable obstacles or look for alternative, although not always legitimate, ways of access which is detrimental to the exploitation of creative works and prevents the true development of an internal digital market,

2011/02/07
Committee: JURI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Welcomes the commitment by the Commission to present legislative proposals regarding orphan works and collective rights management in the beginning of 2011;

2011/02/07
Committee: JURI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls on the Commission to encourage financial support for private sector initiatives to create widely accessible rights and repertoire databases on musical, audiovisual and other repertoire. Such databases would increase transparency and streamline procedures for rights clearance;

2011/02/07
Committee: JURI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Calls on the Commission to encourage the setting up of equitable, impartial and effective dispute-settlement mechanisms for all stakeholders;

2011/02/07
Committee: JURI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Takes the view that the Commission should take into account the specific problems encountered by SMEs when it comes to reinforcing the intellectual property rights corresponding to the principle of "Think Small First" established by the Small Business Act for Europe, inter alia by applying the principle of non-discrimination for SMEs.

2011/02/07
Committee: JURI

2010/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Takes the view that the EU CBRN Action Plan must set ~~higher~~risk-based standards where security assessment criteria for high- risk CBRN facilities are concerned, since the development of ‘criteria’, as stated in the current Action Plan amended and adopted by the Council, is in itself simply not enough and sets an astonishingly low standard, coupled with the low levels of responsibility allocated to the organisations dealing with CBRN materials, relevant Member States authorities and EU bodies;

2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE

2010/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Believes that the Commission and Member State authorities should oversee the activities carried out by the organisations dealing with high-risk CBRN materials and should ensure that these organisations comply with ~~the highest attainable~~risk-based security and public safety standards, which implies that proper inspections of high-risk sites must be carried out regularly;

2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE

2010/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Considers that the EU CBRN Action Plan should unambiguously call for the development of EU guidelines on security training and standard requirements to be implemented in all 27 Member States, and should ensure that specific training programmes are provided for those security staff dealing with high-risk CBRN materials, including staff in industries and research centres where high-risk CBRN are present, and that requirements are laid down for CBRN officers (role, competence and training); stresses that safety and awareness training must also be provided to first responders;

2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE

2010/2114(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Stresses the need to create regional/EU- wide stockpiles of response resources, of which the magnitude should, as far as it is possible, reflect the current level of threat, whether medical or other types of relevant equipment, under the coordination of the European Civil Protection Mechanism; stresses the importance of keeping well managed stockpiles to ensure that the response resources, medical or other relevant equipment, are fully functional, current and up to date; urges that until such time as this EU/regional pooling of resources comes into effect, the EU CBRN Action Plan should point to a possible way in which Member States would share counter- measures and resources in the event of a CBRN accident or terrorist attack, so as to put the new Solidarity Clause into practice;

2010/11/11
Committee: LIBE

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Urges that, in connection with the impact assessment, a cost-benefit analysis – i.e. an examination of the cost-efficiency of all programmes and measures involving expenditure – should always be carried out, and potential implications for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) examined; calls in this connection for the consistent application of the ‘SME test’ proposed in the 2008 Small Business Act; recalls in this context that ~~for each~~in every law imposing a burdens on SMEs~~, an existing such law should be repealed (the ‘one in, one out’ rule)~~ there should be a careful evaluation of existing regulations with the aim at reducing the overall regulatory burden on SMEs;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Stresses that impact assessments must ~~not lead to more bureaucracy and unnecessary~~be allowed sufficient time in order to produce a reliable result without causing unwarranted delays in the legislative procedure; further stresses in this connection that impact assessments should not be abused as a means of holding up unwanted legislation; urges, therefore, that the technical and administrative conditions be created to ensure that impact assessments are carried out speedily and promptly, e.g. through such instruments as framework agreements, accelerated tendering procedures and the optimal use of resources;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Stresses that the members of the IAB are independent only in formal terms, since they are currently appointed by and subject to the instructions of the Commission President, and cannot therefore be said to be fully independent; calls, therefore, for the members of the IAB to be appointed by the European Parliament and the Council ~~on the basis of a Commission proposal,~~ and no longer subject to the instructions of the Commission President;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the early and comprehensive involvement – including by means of notification and interim reports – of the European Parliament, and in particular of its relevant committees, and the Council in the whole impact assessment process and in the work of the IAB; stresses in this context that the participation of Parliament and Council should focus on ensuring that all relevant issues are addressed by the impact assessment without jeopardizing the independence of the impact assessment by influencing the actual evaluation;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls for the European Parliament and the Council to be provided in every case with a written explanation of why the Commission does not wish to carry out an impact assessment in connection with a specific legislative proposal;deleted

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28 a. Suggests that all completed impact assessments by the Commission should be published in a special publication series by the Commission so that they can easily be referenced and searched by the public on a dedicated website;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

~~29. Calls for the systematic ex-post evaluation by the Commission of legal acts adop~~deleted;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Diana WALLIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Further recalls that impact assessments need not form part of a time-consuming study but may also take the form of limited studies, workshops and expert hearings;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)

37a. Stresses that apart from the usual parliamentary impact assessments commissioned by committees there should be a strengthened possibility for committees to request assessment of the added-value of European legislation, as proposed by the Bureau;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Diana WALLIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)

37b. Calls in addition for individual MEPs to have the scope to request small studies to provide them with relevant facts or statistics in areas relating to their parliamentary work, and suggests that such studies may be undertaken by the European Parliament's library to complement its current functions;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Diana WALLIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 c (new)

37c. Calls therefore for the European Parliament's Bureau to adopt plans for the European Parliament's library to provide members with this service; stresses that any plans should be based on the best practices of parliamentary libraries, including those of Member States, and should be carried out, according to strict rules and in full cooperation with the research function serving committees;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/2016(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Calls for the appropriate ~~budget- neutral~~ funding to be made available for the creation of a body at this level; also calls for the necessary administrative infrastructure to be created to this end;

2011/03/03
Committee: JURI

2010/0251(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 3

(3) debt instruments issued by a Member State or the Union and derivatives set out in Annex I Section C points (4) to (10) of Directive 2004/39/EC that relate to such debt instruments issued by a Member State or the Union or to an obligation of a Member State or the Union.deleted

2011/01/13
Committee: JURI

2010/0251(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6

A trading venue that has shares admitted to trading shall establish procedures that ensure that natural or legal persons executing orders on the trading venue mark sell orders as short orders if the seller is entering into a short sale of the share. The trading venue shall publish at least daily a summary of the volume of orders marked as short orders.deleted

2011/01/13
Committee: JURI

2010/0251(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7

Public disclosure of significant net short 1. A natural or legal person who has a net short position in relation to the issued share capital of a company that has shares admitted to trading on a trading venue shall disclose to the public details of the position whenever the position reaches or falls below a relevant publication threshold referred to in paragraph 2. 2. A relevant publication threshold is a percentage that equals 0.5% of the value of the issued share capital of the company concerned and each 0.1% above that. 3. The Commission may, by means of delegated acts in accordance with Article 36 and subject to the conditions of Articles 37 and 38, modify the thresholds mentioned in paragraph 2, taking into account the developments in financial markets.Article 7 Deleted positions in shares

2011/01/13
Committee: JURI

2010/0251(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12

Restrictions on uncovered short sales 1. A natural or legal person may only enter into a short sale of a share admitted to trading on a trading venue or a short sale of a sovereign debt instrument where one of the following conditions is fulfilled: (a) the natural or legal person has borrowed the share or sovereign debt instrument; (b) the natural or legal person has entered into an agreement to borrow the share or sovereign debt instrument; (c) the natural or legal person has an arrangement with a third party under which that third party has confirmed that the share or sovereign debt instrument has been located and reserved for lending for the natural or legal person so that settlement can be effected when it is due. 2. In order to ensure uniform conditions of application of paragraph 1 powers are conferred to the Commission to adopt implementing technical standards identifying the types of agreements or arrangements that adequately ensure that the share or sovereign debt instrument will be available for settlement. The Commission shall in particular take into account the need to preserve liquidity of markets especially sovereign bond market and sovereign bond repurchase markets (repo markets). The implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph shall be adopted in accordance with Article [7e ]of Regulation (EU) No …/….[ESMA Regulation]. ESMA shall submit drafts for those implementing technical standards to the Commission by 1 January 2012] at the latest.Article 12 deleted

2011/01/13
Committee: JURI

2010/0251(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13

Buy-in procedures and fines for late settlement 1. A trading venue that has shares or sovereign debt admitted to trading shall ensure that it, or the central counterparty that provides clearing services for the trading venue, has procedures in place which comply with all of the following requirements: (a) where a natural or legal person who sells shares or sovereign debt instruments on the venue is not able to deliver the shares or sovereign debt instrument for settlement within four trading days after the day on which the trade takes place, or six trading days after the day on which the trade takes place in the case of market making activities, then procedures are automatically triggered for the trading venue or central counterparty to buy-in the shares or sovereign debt instrument to ensure delivery for settlement; (b) where the trading venue or central counterparty is not able to buy-in the shares or the sovereign debt instrument for delivery then cash compensation is paid by the trading venue or the central counterparty to the buyer based on the value of the shares or the debt to be delivered at the delivery date plus an amount for any losses incurred by the buyer; (c) the natural or legal person who fails to settle pays an amount to the trading venue or central counterparty to reimburse the trading venue or central counterparty for all amounts paid pursuant to points (a) and (b). 2. A trading venue that has shares or sovereign debt instruments admitted to trading shall ensure that it has procedures in place, or that the settlement system that provides settlement services for the shares or sovereign debt instrument has procedures in place, which ensure that where a natural or legal person who sells shares or sovereign debt instrument on the venue fails to deliver the shares or sovereign debt instrument for settlement by the date on which settlement is due, then such natural or legal person is subject to the obligation to make daily payments to the trading venue or settlement system for each day that the failure continues. The daily payments shall be sufficiently high not to allow the seller to make a profit from the settlement failure and to act as a deterrent to natural or legal persons failing to settle. 3. A trading venue that has shares or sovereign debt admitted to trading shall have in place rules that enable it to prohibit a natural or legal person that is a member of the trading venue from entering into further short sales of shares or sovereign debt instruments on the trading venue as long as that person fails to settle a transaction resulting from a short sale on that trading venue.Article 13 deleted

2011/01/13
Committee: JURI

2010/0251(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24

1. In accordance with Article [6a(5)] of Regulation (EU) No …/…. [ESMA Regulation], ESMA shall, where all conditions in paragraph 2 are satisfied, take one or more of the following measures: (a) require natural or legal persons who have net short positions in relation to a specific financial instrument or class of financial instruments to notify a competent authority or to disclose to the public details of any such position; (b) prohibit or impose conditions relating to natural or legal persons entering into a short sale or a transaction which creates, or relates to, a financial instrument and the effect or one of the effects of the transaction is to confer a financial advantage on the natural or legal person in the event of a decrease in the price or value of another financial instrument; (c) limit natural or legal persons from entering into credit default swap transactions relating to an obligation of a Member State or the Union or limit the value of uncovered credit default swap positions that a natural or legal person may enter into relating to an obligation of a Member State or the Union; (d) prevent natural or legal persons from entering into transactions relating to a financial instruments or limit the value of transactions in the financial instrument that may be entered into. A measure may apply in circumstances or be subject to exceptions specified by the relevant competent authority. Exceptions may in particular be specified to apply to market making activities and primary market activities. 2. ESMA shall only take a decision under paragraph 1 if all of the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the measures listed in points (a) to (d) of paragraph 1 address a threat to the orderly functioning and integrity of financial markets or the stability of the whole or part of the financial system in the Union and there are cross border implications; (b) a competent authority or competent authorities have not taken measures to address the threat or measures that have been taken do not sufficiently address the threat. 3. When taking measures referred to in paragraph 1 ESMA shall take into account the extent to which the measure: (a) will significantly address the threat to the orderly functioning and integrity of financial markets or the stability of the whole or part of the financial system in the Union or significantly improve the ability of competent authorities to monitor the threat; (b) will not create a risk of regulatory arbitrage; (c) will not have a detrimental effect on the efficiency of financial markets, including reducing liquidity in those markets or creating uncertainty for market participants, that is disproportionate to the benefits of the measure. Where a competent authority or competent authorities have taken a measure under Articles 16, 17 or 18, ESMA may take any of the measures referred to in paragraph 1 without issuing the opinion provided for in Article 23. 4. Before deciding to impose or renew any measure referred to in paragraph 1, ESMA shall consult, where appropriate, with the European Systemic Risk Board and other relevant authorities. 5. Before deciding to impose or renew any measure referred to in paragraph 1, ESMA shall notify competent authorities of the measure it proposes. The notification shall include details of the proposed measures, the class of financial instruments and transactions to which they will apply, the evidence supporting those reasons and when the measures are intended to take effect. 6. The notification shall be made not less than 24 hours before the measure is intended to take effect or to be renewed. In exceptional circumstances, ESMA may make the notification less than 24 hours before the measure is intended to take effect where it is not possible to give 24 hours notice. 7. ESMA shall publish on its website notice of any decision to impose or renew any measure referred to in paragraph 1. The notice shall at least specify the following details: (a) the measures imposed including the instruments and class of transactions to which they apply and the duration of the measures; (b) the reasons why ESMA is of the opinion that it is necessary to impose the measures including the evidence supporting the reasons. 8. A measure shall take effect when the notice is published or at a time specified in the notice that is after its publication and shall only apply in relation to a transaction entered into after the measure takes effect. 9. ESMA shall review its measures referred to in paragraph (1) at appropriate intervals and at least every three months. If a measure is not renewed after that three month period, it shall automatically expire. Paragraphs 2 to 8 shall apply to a renewal of measures. 10. A measure adopted by ESMA under this Article shall prevail over any previous measure taken by a competent authority under Section 1.Article 24 deleted ESMA intervention powers

2011/01/13
Committee: JURI

2010/0251(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 3

3. The competent authorities ~~shall conclude~~may not enter into cooperation a~~gre~~rrangements ~~on exchange of information with the competent authorities of third countries~~with third countries which result in obligations for Member States other than those concerning the provision of information. Cooperation arrangements on exchange of information may be entered into only where the information disclosed is subject to guarantees of professional secrecy which are at least equivalent to those set out in Article 29. Such exchange of information must be intended for the performance of the tasks of those competent authorities.

2011/01/13
Committee: JURI

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Stanimir ILCHEV, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) In order to ensure coherence and transparency in relation to proposed citizens' initiatives, it should be mandatory to register such initiatives on a website made available by the Commission prior to collecting the necessary statements of support from citizens; proposals that are abusive or devoid of seriousness should not be registered and the Commission should reject the registration of proposals which would be manifestly against the values of the Union, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union. The Commission should deal with registration in accordance with the general principles of good administration.

2010/10/13
Committee: LIBE

2010/0074(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) For that purpose, it is also appropriate to establish the minimum number of citizens coming from each of those Member States. In order to ensure ~~simila~~fair conditions for citizens ~~to support a citizens' initiative~~of all nationalities, these minimum numbers should be degressively proportional ~~to the size of each Member State. For the purpose of clarity they should be set out for each Member State in an Annex to the present Regulation~~according to the formula as agreed from time to time for the distribution of seats in the European Parliament.

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4

4. The Commission shall reject the registration of proposed citizens' initiatives which are manifestly against the values of the Union, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.

2010/10/13
Committee: LIBE

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Diana WALLIS, Stanimir ILCHEV, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) It is appropriate to provide that, where a citizens' initiative has received the necessary statements of support from signatories ~~and provided it is considered admissible~~, each Member State should be responsible for the verification and certification of statements of support collected ~~from citizens coming from~~in that State. Taking account of the need to limit the administrative burden for Member States, they should, within a period of three months, carry out such verifications on the basis of appropriate checks, which may be based on random sampling, and should issue a document certifying the number of valid statements of support received.

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Diana WALLIS, Stanimir ILCHEV, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) The Commission should examine a citizens' initiative and set out its ~~conclusions and the actions it envisages to take in response to it, within a period of four months~~legal and political conclusions separately; it should also set out the actions it envisages to take in response to it. In order to demonstrate that a citizens' initiative is supported by at least one million signatories and that its possible follow-up is carefully examined, the Commission should explain in a clear, comprehensible and detailed manner the reasons for its intended action, and should likewise give reasons if it does not envisage taking any action.

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Diana WALLIS, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Stanimir ILCHEV

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 2

2. "Signatories"” means ~~citizens of the Union~~all legally resident inhabitants of the Member States that have supported a given citizens"’ initiative by completing a statement of support for that initiative;

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b

b. examine the citizens' initiative and, within 4 months, set out in a communication its conclusions on the initiative, ~~the action it intends to take, if any, and its reasons for doing so~~as well as the appropriate proposal on the matter where citizens have indicated that a legal act is required. Should the Commission decide to take some alternative action, or not to take any action, it shall state its reasons for its decision in a communication.

2010/10/13
Committee: LIBE

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Diana WALLIS, Stanimir ILCHEV

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2

2. In order to be eligible to support a proposed citizens' initiative, signatories shall be ~~citizens of~~legally resident within the Union and shall be ~~of the age to be entitled to vote in the European elections~~at least 16 years of age.

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

2. The list of citizens' initiatives tabled, as well as the communication referred to in paragraph 1(b), shall be notified to the organiser of the citizens' initiative as well as to the European Parliament and the Council and shall be made public.

2010/10/13
Committee: LIBE

2010/0074(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The Commission shall deliver a public annual report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of citizens' initiatives , indicating inter alia the number of initiatives submitted, their admissibility and the follow-up given by the Commission to each initiative.

2010/10/13
Committee: LIBE

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Stanimir ILCHEV, Diana WALLIS, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3

3. ~~Proposed citizens' initiatives which can be reasonably regarded as improper because they are abusive or devoid of seriousness will not be registered.~~ The Commission shall register a proposed initiative within two months from its receipt when the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) the citizens' committee has been formed and the contact persons have been designated; (b) there are no manifest, significant inconsistencies between the different language versions of the title, subject- matter and objectives of the proposed initiative; (c) the initiative manifestly falls within the competences of the Union as conferred on the Union by Member States and falls within the framework of the powers of the Commission to submit any appropriate proposal on matters where citizens consider that a legal act of the Union is required for the purpose of implementing the Treaties; (d) the proposed initiative is not manifestly abusive, frivolous or vexatious; (e) the proposed initiative is not manifestly contrary to the values of the Union as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Stanimir ILCHEV, Diana WALLIS, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

aa. receive the organisers at an appropriate level to allow them to explain in detail the matters raised by the initiative;

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Diana WALLIS, Stanimir ILCHEV, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)

ab. consider the organisation of a public hearing on the subject-matter of the initiative, to which the European Parliament, through its responsible committee, may be invited to participate;

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Stanimir ILCHEV, Diana WALLIS, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b

b. ~~examine the citizens' initiative and, within 4~~within three months, set out in a communication its legal and political conclusions on the initiative, the action it intends to take, if any, and its reasons for doing or not doing so.

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0074(COD)

Andrew DUFF, Guy VERHOFSTADT, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Stanimir ILCHEV, Diana WALLIS, Alexandra THEIN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

ba. present a legislative proposal within one year or include the proposal in its next year's Work Programme. If the Commission does not so act it shall give the organisers as well as the European Parliament a detailed explanation.

2010/11/16
Committee: AFCO

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) Sexual abuse of children takes place most frequently in the direct environment of children, during a longer period, by figures of authority, such as parents, relatives, teachers, child minders, or religious leaders. The relationship of dependence between the victim and the perpetrator, strict social or moral conventions with the community, feelings of guilt and fear of retribution or exclusion by the community, make it extremely difficult for young victims to speak out, and sometimes they remain silent far into adulthood. This is an important obstacle to effective prosecution of child abuse. Child abuse therefore often goes unreported or unpunished.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 7

(7) This Directive does not govern Member States' policies with regard to consensual sexual activities in which children may be involved and which can be regarded as the normal discovery of sexuality in the course of human development, taking account of the different cultural and legal traditions and of new forms of establishing and maintaining relations among children and adolescents, including through information and communication technologies. These issues fall outside of the scope of this Directive. It is up to Member States to define, with regard to these issues, what should and what should not be criminalised.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)

(9a) Member States should foster open dialogue and communication with countries outside the EU in order to be able to prosecute perpetrators, under the relevant national legislation, who travel outside EU borders for the purposes of sex tourism.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 12

(12) Where the danger posed by the offenders and the possible risks of repetition of the offences make it appropriate, convicted offenders should be temporarily or permanently prevented from exercising professional activities involving regular contacts with children, where appropriate. Implementation of such prohibitions throughout the EU should be facilitated.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 13

(13) Child pornography, which constitutes sex abuse images, is a specific type of content which cannot be construed as the expression of an opinion. To combat it, it is necessary to reduce the circulation of child abuse material by making it more difficult for offenders to upload such content onto the publicly accessible Web. Action is therefore necessary to remove the content at source a~~nd apprehend those guilty~~s quickly as possible as well as to apprehend and take action against those who are under strong suspicion of making, distributing or downloading child abuse images. The EU, in particular through increased cooperation with third countries and ~~international organisations, should seek to facilitate the effective removal by third country authorities of websites containing child pornography, which are hosted in their territory~~with the help of bilateral or multilateral agreements, should seek to facilitate the effective removal of Internet pages containing or disseminating child abuse material as well as facilitate the criminal prosecution by third country authorities of persons in their territory who placed child abuse material on websites or caused its distribution over the Internet. However as, despite such efforts, the removal of child pornography content at its source proves to be difficult where the original materials are not located within the EU, ~~mechanisms should also be put in place to block access from the Union's~~Member States may implement additional measures to restrict access by Internet users in their territory to iInternet pages ~~identified as~~ containing or disseminating child ~~pornography~~abuse material. For that purpose, different mechanisms can be used as appropriate, including facilitating the competent judicial or police authorities to order additional measures, such as blocking, or supporting and stimulating Internet Service Providers on a voluntary basis to develop codes of conduct and guidelines for ~~block~~restricting access to such Internet pages. ~~Both with a view to the removal and the blocking of child abuse content, cooperation between public authorities should be established and strengthened~~All technical measures to eliminate or restrict access to Internet pages containing or disseminating child abuse material should be subject to a strengthened cooperation between public authorities, particularly in the interest of ensuring that national lists of websites containing child pornography material are as complete as possible and of avoiding duplication of work. Any such ~~developments must take account of~~measures must respect the rights of the end users, adhere to existing legal and judicial procedures and comply with the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The Safer Internet Programme has set up a network of hotlines whose goal is to collect information and to ensure coverage and exchange of reports on the major types of illegal content online.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – subpoint iv

(iv) realistic images of a child engaged in sexually explicit conduct or realistic images of the sexual organs of a child, ~~regardless of the actual existence of such child,~~ for primarily sexual purposes.;

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. It shall be within the discretion of the Member States to decide whether this Article applies to cases involving child pornography, as referred to in Article 2(b)(iii), where the person appearing to be a child was in fact 18 years of age or older at the time of depiction.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that investigations into or the prosecution of the offences referred to in Articles 3 to 7 are not dependent on a report or accusation being made by the victim or by its representative, and that the criminal proceedings may continue even if the victim has withdrawn their statements.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Member States shall ensure in cases of sexual abuse and sexual exploitation within the context of the family, circle of relatives or friends, school sports, church or other parts of the regular day-to-day environment of the child the necessary measures are undertaken to protect and provide assistance to the child victim, as well as to other family members who where not involved in the offence.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Member States shall take the necessary measures, where in the interest of the child victims and taking into account other overriding interests, to protect their privacy, their identity and their image and to prevent the public dissemination of any information that could lead to their identification.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – title

~~Blocking access to websit~~Technical measures to eliminate web pages containing child ~~pornography~~abuse material

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Jan Philipp ALBRECHT, Françoise CASTEX, Cornelia ERNST, Nadja HIRSCH, Ska KELLER, Jean LAMBERT, Stavros LAMBRINIDIS, Birgit SIPPEL, Rui TAVARES, Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – title

~~Blocking access to~~Measures addressing websites containing child ~~pornography~~abuse images

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Jan Philipp ALBRECHT, Françoise CASTEX, Cornelia ERNST, Nadja HIRSCH, Ska KELLER, Jean LAMBERT, Stavros LAMBRINIDIS, Birgit SIPPEL, Rui TAVARES, Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall take the necessary legal measures to obtain the ~~blocking of access by Internet users in their territory to I~~removal at source of internet pages containing or disseminating child pornography. The blocking of access shall be subject to adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the blocking is limited to what is necessary, that users are informed of the reason for the blocking and that content providers, as far as possible, are informed of the possibility of challenging itabuse images.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Jan Philipp ALBRECHT, Françoise CASTEX, Cornelia ERNST, Nadja HIRSCH, Ska KELLER, Jean LAMBERT, Stavros LAMBRINIDIS, Birgit SIPPEL, Rui TAVARES, Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2

2. ~~Without prejudice to the above, Member States shall take the necessary measures to obtain the removal of i~~In addition, when removal of content at source has proven impossible to achieve, Member States may, where prescribed by law and necessary, set up proportionate and transparent procedures to restrict access by Internet users in their territory to Internet pages containing or disseminating child ~~pornography.~~ abuse images.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

2010/0064(COD)

Jan Philipp ALBRECHT, Françoise CASTEX, Cornelia ERNST, Nadja HIRSCH, Ska KELLER, Jean LAMBERT, Stavros LAMBRINIDIS, Birgit SIPPEL, Rui TAVARES, Kyriacos TRIANTAPHYLLIDES, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM

Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Any measure under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and general principles of Union law. It shall provide for a prior ruling including the right to an effective and timely judicial review.

2011/01/19
Committee: LIBE

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 i~~llegal~~rregular immigration and trafficking in human beings and to reduce the threats to the internal security, public policy, public health and international relations of the Member States.

2011/01/06
Committee: LIBE

2010/09/30
Committee: LIBE

2007/0112(COD)