47 Amendments of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2013/2024(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Treaty of Lisbon brought important positive elements to the area of freedom, security and justice but deplornotes certain shortcomings in its implementation; is no longer willing to accept that the Council and the Commission, in many instances, continue to act as if the Treaty of Lisbon had not entered into forcepoints out that the Treaty of Lisbon signifies increased powers for Parliament; requests the fulfilment of the obligation to inform the Parliament ‘immediately and fully at all stages of the procedure’ leading to the conclusion of international agreements; regrets the unacceptable delays in bringing the acts of the former third pillar in line with the Treaty of Lisbon; calls for a case-by-case assessment of the former third pillar acts with regard to how theyir impact on fundamental rights, with a view to bringing them in line with the new hierarchy of norms of basic, delegated and implementing acts;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the era of large- scale multiannual programmes based on the intergovernmental approach is over, given the array of legal bases providedEncourages the Council's decision from its informal meeting in July 2013 to adopt a successor programme for by the Treaties in the policy spheres covered by the area of freedom, security and justice, the scope for the Commission to make use of its right to propose legislation and its stated ambition to do soStockholm Programme, notes further that a scope and volume of this programme still have to be defined;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. EncouragesNotes that the Commission, therefore, to assume its role in framing polici can make use of its right to propose legislation with full respect to its competences ands setting legislative priorities and to make use of its right to propose legislation whenever necessary by the treaties including the principle of subsidiarity and in close cooperation with the co-legislators; states, at the same time, its opposition to any return to the intergovernmental approach which characterised the era prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
Uniform electoral law for the European Parliament elections
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that, even in the absence of an agreement on a uniform electoral procedure for the European Parliament elections, electoral systems are gradually becoming more similar, in particular as a result of the establishment of political parties at European Union level4 , the work on drawing up a European statute based on the Commission proposal for a reform of the rules governing European political parties5 and the ban on holding a dual mandate6 , which has made the office of Member of the European Parliament incompatible with that of Member of a national parliament; encourages more transparent procedures for the nomination of candidates that guarantee their independence and the possibility to introduce direct constituencies;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Is of the view that, in general terms, the implementation of the Stockholm Programme does not live up to its ambition to promote citizens’ rightStockholm Programme was very ambitious, that it has not yet been fully implemented and that its implementation needs to be stepped up in order to promote justice, security and civil liberties;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes that the Stockholm Programme aims to facilitate the free movement of European citizens and further improve security in the Union and thus protect the lives and safety of citizens of the Union and to tackle organised crime, terrorism and other threats by defending and respecting all the rights and obligations deriving from a European area of justice, and that judicial cooperation represents the mainone tool to achieve this objective;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recognises that initiatives in the field of the mutual recognition of legal situations, judgments and documents play a very important role in this respect, as mutual recognition leaves the legal systems of Member States unchanged, but reduces the inconvenience which differences in regulation cause for individual citizens by reducing the inconvenience which differences in regulation cause for individual citizens, hence notes that initiatives such as mutual recognition should be based upon clear and common minimum standards, respecting the rule of law and the fundamental rights, ultimately thoroughness should prevail over rapidity;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Considers that mutual recognition requires that citizens and legal professionals trust each other’s legal institutions; notes that the strengthening of a truly European legal culture that is fully respectful of the principles of subsidiary and of judicial independence, the establishment of common standards and an understanding of other legal systems, in particular through training, plays a very important role in underpinning mutual recognition and trust; points out that mutual recognition and trust can lead to gradual changes in national civil law traditions through an exchange of best practices between Member States;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Acknowledges the progress made with the roadmap for procedural rights in criminal proceedings, but regretnotes that key proposals on legal aid and, vulnerable suspects are outstanding and that the level of ambition of the Council seems to be decreasing more and morend the communication with relatives are outstanding and that efforts should be continued to adopt all proposals in a swift manner;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Believes that mutual trust between the Member States must be strengthened and that mutual recognition and harmonisation of EU criminal law cannot progress without serious feed-back on the implementation of these rules at Member State level; welcomes the important steps that have been taken in this extend like the European Arrest Warrant;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Notes with satisfaction the progress made by the Member States and the Commission in the context of the Internal Security Strategy (ISS) and the EU policy cycle on organised and serious international crime; points out, however, that further progress needs to be made, for instance in the fields of cybercrime, cyber- facilitated crime such as child pornography, protection of critical infrastructure and the fights against organised crime, including economic crimes, corruption, money laundering, terrorist funding and the trade in illegal firearms, notably through strengthening the according Agencies on the European level;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Encourages thought to be given to the possibility of withdrawing 500-euro notes so as to combat money laundering and criminal networks more effectively;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Recalls that Parliament is now a fully- fledged institutional actor in the field of security policies, and is therefore entitled to participate actively in determining the features and priorities of the ISS and in evaluating those instruments, including through regular monitoring exercises on by monitoring the implementation of the ISS, to be conducted jointly by the European Parliament, national parliaments and the Council under Articles 70 and 71 TFEU;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Believes that a proper analysis of the security threats to be addressed is an essential prerequisite for an effective ISS; notes the usefulness of Europol's analyses in this connection;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Points out that the current ISS will come to an end in 2014; calls on the Commission to start preparing a new ISS for the period 2015-2019 which takes account of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into Union law; calls on the Council to take Parliament’s input, and Europol's risk analyses, for the new ISS properly into account before adopting the new strategy;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Acknowledges that cross-border crime is on the increase in the EU and therefore underlines the importance of European law enforcement information exchange, cooperation and a sufficient funding of its agencies; believes that the current ‘landscape’ of the different instruments, channels and tools is complicated and scattered,; leading to inefficient use of the instruments available and to inadequate democratic oversight at EU levelpossible lacks of transparency and coordination among the different actors; calls for a future- oriented vision on how to shape and optimise law enforcement data sharing in the EU while guaranteeing a robust level of data protection;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Acknowledges that cross-border crime is on the increase in the EU and therefore underlines the importance of European law enforcement information exchange; believes that the current ‘landscape’ of the different instruments, channels and tools is complicated and scattered, leading to inefficient use of the instruments available and to inadequate democratic oversight at EU level; calls for a future-oriented vision on how to shape and optimise law enforcement data sharing in the EU while guaranteeing a robust level of data protection; notes the need to boost law enforcement authorities' confidence in each other so as to step up information exchanges;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Commission quickly to bring forwardto consider proposals to bring cross- border police cooperation instruments adopted under the former third pillar – such as the Prüm Decision and the Swedish Initiative – underwithin the legal framework of the Lisbon Treaty only in case there is justified need for further regulation and that the proposal will improve the instrument;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Welcomes the Commission's proposal for the new Europol Regulation and hopes for a quick advancement of this important legislative dossier so that Europol can be brought into line with the Lisbon Treaty as soon as possiblwill be able to more effectively fulfil its role to fight organised cross-border crime;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal forchange of legal basis and positive developments proposed by the Commission for Europol, with a view to the new Europol Regulation, and hopes for a quick advancement of this important legislative dossier so that Europol can be brought into line with the Lisbon Treaty as soon as possible;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 b (new)
Paragraph 36 b (new)
36b. Notes that trafficking in the EU, both of drugs and of people, is continuing to expand and that the relevant European policies need to be strengthened;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 d (new)
Paragraph 36 d (new)
36d. Calls for the resources allocated for joint investigation teams to be expanded without excessive red tape;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36e. Calls for policies to protect children against all forms of violence, including in the digital environment, to be strengthened;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Welcomes the conclusion of the negotiations on the Schengen Governance Package; calls on the Commission fully to play its roles as coordinator of the Schengen evaluations and as guardian of the Treaty, in order to avoid any situation that could endanger the functioning of the Schengen area; repeats its position that the Schis concerned about the current events, including breaches of fundamental rights and police brutality in Bulgaria; expresses its concerns over the indepengden area should, without further delay, be enlarce of the constitutional court and the rule of law in Romania and Bulgaria; supports and encourageds to include Romania and Bulgariahe Commission to support all efforts of Bulgaria and Romania to join the Schengen area as soon as possible;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Considers the absence of controls at internal borders as one of the major achievements of European integration; requests the Commission to pay particular attention to the absence of controls at internal borders, and firmly rejects all unjustified attempts to limit the freedom of movement of persons;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Acknowledges that the Schengen area is a kind of laboratory that so far has been developed step by step; is nevertheless of the opinion that a long-term reflection about its further development is necessary, with a view to strengthening external border controls; believes that the Schengen external borders should in the future be guarded by European border guards;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Acknowledges that the Schengen area is a kind of laboratorysui generis that so far has been developed step by step; is nevertheless of the opinion that a long-term reflection about its further development is necessary; believes that the Schengen external borders should in the future be guarded bywith the support of European border guards;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Welcomes the reform of the mandate of FRONTEX and the agreement on Eurosur; considers that the new rules for the surveillance of sea borders need to be agreed on as soon as possible, that priority should be given to saving the lives of migrants and that the principle of non- refoulement is to be fully respected; considers that the saving of lives starts already in the third country and that cooperation with third countries should be improved;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Welcomes the successfulRegrets the late migration to the Schengen Information System II and its increased costs, the continued roll-out of the Visa Information System and the setting-up of the agency eu-LISA for their operational management; underlines that these new systems now need to stand the test of everyday use; recalls its request that ‘new border management instruments or large-scale data storage systems should not be launched until the existing tools are necessary, fully operational, safe and reliable’; is looking forward to the evaluations of the systems foreseen in the respective legal instruments;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Calls for a much better implementationWelcomes the progress made in the field of the visa acquis and greater harmonisation of visa procedures and practices; believes that common visa application centres should become the standard; calls forhave proven to be an useful tool; believes that an interinstitutional discussion on the objectives of the common visa policy can be useful to elaborate further steps of a further harmonisation of visa procedures, including common rules on the issuing of visas;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Recalls that in the Stockholm Programme the European Council had underlined ‘that well-managed migration can be beneficial to all stakeholders’; regrets the limitedexpects that further progress is made in the adoption of legislation in the field of legal migration, and calls for greater efforts in the future in view of the demographic challenges and the needs of the economy; believes, at the same time, that the integration of migrants requires greater attention;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Welcomes the adoption of the asylum package; calls on the Commission to monitor the correct and comprehensive implementation of the package by theevery Member States as from the date of application;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Deeply deplores the failure to make the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, as laid down in Article 80 TFEU, a reality; believerecalls that accentuated and more concrete measures will be necessary in the future; are available in particular for Member States that experience difficult situations; encourages Member States to make efficient use of these support measures such as those offered by EASO to improve the situation of all applicants for asylum; encourages the Commission to investigate solutions for a redistribution of applicants for international protection in case one Member State suffers from a high influx the Member State cannot handle on its own although all provisions of EU legislation are implemented;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Believes that the external dimensionEU coordination and support in the field of asylum should be expanded, especially in relation to resettlement;
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 a (new)
Paragraph 47 a (new)
47 a. Believes that through closer coordination and cooperation between the Commission, Member States and the EU Agencies such as Europol, Frontex, EASO, ENISA, EMCDDA and eu-LISA, the implementation of new legislation and the benefits from these Agencies for Member States can be improved;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 b (new)
Paragraph 47 b (new)
47 b. underlines the necessity to strengthen mechanisms and tools to ensure equal implementation and to avoid abuse within the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice; stresses the importance of information sharing on both national and EU level and when necessary the possibility to use suspension clauses in EU legislation;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. DeploRegrets the absence of an objective evaluation of the progress towards an area of freedom, security and justice and of reliable information on the Member States’ implementation of theat there is not more information available on the Member States’ implementation of European legislation to make it easier for legislators and citizens to monitor the application and development of the European acquis;
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
Amendment 291 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49a. Regrets that impact assessments have not always been adequate and have not always made it possible to assess objectively the costs of new measures; stresses the importance of avoiding any excessive bureaucracy;
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Welcomes the initiative of the Commission in drawing up the EU Justice Scoreboard which aims at ensuring a high- quality justice system in the area of civil, commercial and administrative law since, at the end of the day, the concrete application of laws is in the hands of the courts; calls for the justice scoreboard exercise to assess all justice areas, including criminal justice and all horizontal issues; proposes that data regarding the state of the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights, and the fulfilment of European values (Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU)) in all Member States be included as well;
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Requests the Commission to put more emphasis on overseeing and ensuring the concrete implementation of EU legislation by the Member States; notes that, when the rights of citizens are concerned, this needs to be done as of the first day an act enters into force; considers that more needs to be done in this area, and that the reasons for any failure to implement EU legislation should be identified;
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Is of the opinion that improving the quality of EU legislation in the area of freedom, security and justice requires a joint effort by the Member States and the European institutions in order to improve the exchange of information on each national system and to provide accurate legal information (on national/regional applicable legislation and standards) as well as information on implementation and practises; calls for better interinstitutional coordination;
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. DeploRegrets that the Council’s frequent recourse to does not involve Parliament more in the drawing up of strategy documents, such as the drugs strategy and the internal security strategy, which are adopted without any involvement of Parliament;
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Considers that the development of a European judicial and police culture is a key prerequisite for making the area of freedom, security and justice a reality for citizens; calls, with this in mind, for much greater emphasis on, and funding for, EU judicial training for all legal professionals and police forces; notes the importance of using a ‘bottom-up approach’ for judicial training schemes, of ensuring the greater accessibility of European law information resources via web technology (i.e. an e- justice portal), of improving knowledge of European law among the judiciary as well as of the linguistic skills of judicial practitioners, and of establishing and maintaining networks in this field; notes that the training of police forces with a European perspective is equally importantnd language skills among the judiciary and police forces, and of establishing and maintaining networks in this field and any other measures to facilitate their cooperation on a day-to- day basis;
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Demands that any future programming be prepared in the spirit of the Treaty of Lisbon in a joint exercise of Parliament, the Council and the Commission; believes it is necessary to focus on the implementation and consolidation of existing instruments and that a future programme should therefore be short and balanced; takes note of the European Council conclusions of 27/28 June this year according to which the European Council ‘will hold a discussion at its June 2014 meeting to define strategic guidelines for legislative and operational planning in the area of freedom, security and justice (pursuant to Article 68 TFEU)’, considers the envisaged timing as inappropriate;