59 Amendments of Cecilia WIKSTRÖM related to 2018/0331(COD)
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
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.
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
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).
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
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.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
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.
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
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 third partiese 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 third parties and websites where users can make comments or post reviewse 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.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
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 taskfreely 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.
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
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 thCompetent 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).
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
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.
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
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.
Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
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-uploadappearance 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).
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
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 risksthere 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.
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
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 fAfter this time, the data affected should be erased, in compliance with Article 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental rRights concerned.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
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.
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
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.
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
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.
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
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.
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
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 authoritiesy 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.
Amendment 238 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
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.
Amendment 272 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
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.
Amendment 273 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
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.
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
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:
Amendment 294 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
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 partieswhose primary purpose is to make and provide content available to the general public;
Amendment 311 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part
(5) 'illegal terrorist content' means one or more of the following information:
Amendment 333 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point c
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;
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
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;
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘dissemination of terrorist content’ means making terrorist content available to third partiese general public on the hosting service providers’ services;
Amendment 381 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authority shall have the power to issue a decisionremoval 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.
Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
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.
Amendment 402 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – point b
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);
Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4
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 reasonsThe 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.
Amendment 422 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 4 a (new)
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.
Amendment 424 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. The competent authoritiesy 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.
Amendment 439 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 9
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.
Amendment 456 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 7
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 authoritiesy or relevant Union body, setting out what further information or clarification is required.
Amendment 465 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 474 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 481 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
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;
Amendment 497 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
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.
Amendment 502 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
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 providercompetent authority shall coopellaborate 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.
Amendment 508 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Amendment 512 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)
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).
Amendment 513 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Article 6 – paragraph 5
Amendment 522 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
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:
Amendment 527 #
(a) proceedings of administrative or judicial review and remedy,
Amendment 538 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
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).
Amendment 549 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 553 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
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.
Amendment 557 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) information about the hosting service provider’s measures to prevent the re-uploadappearance of content which has previously been removed or to which access has been disabled because it is considered to be terrorist content;
Amendment 598 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 605 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
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.
Amendment 613 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that their competent authoritiesy haves the necessary capability and sufficient resources to achieve the aims and fulfil their obligations under this Regulation.
Amendment 623 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
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.
Amendment 652 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Amendment 666 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Each Member State shall designate the authority ora single administrative or judicial authoritiesy competent to
Amendment 676 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) oversee the implementation of voluntary proactive measures pursuant to Article 6;
Amendment 679 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)
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.
Amendment 690 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 730 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
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.
Amendment 732 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
It shall apply from [612 months after its entry into force].