Activities of Monica MACOVEI related to 2011/2033(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
EU pre-accession funds: judicial systems and the fight against corruption (short presentation)
Reports (1)
REPORT on budgetary management of European Union pre-accession funds in the areas of judicial systems and the fight against corruption in the candidate and potential candidate countries PDF (263 KB) DOC (166 KB)
Amendments (62)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the enforcement of the rule of law, notably through judicial reform, and the fight against corruption and organised crime in the countries of Western Balkans and Turkey are considered by the Commission as top priorities, and whereas starting from 2012 the "New Approach" has been applied under the enlargement policy tackling justice reforms and home affairs early in the accession process through the establishment of a new negotiation methodology for enlargement countries starting accession negotiations, including clear priorities and conditionalities, thus aiming at a better prioritisation of financial assistance under IPA II,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas the European Union delivers financial assistance to candidate and potential candidate countries through the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) which replaced the programmes TPA, PHARE and CARDS as of 2007, and whereas, with exception of Iceland, all candidate and potential candidate countries benefit from EU pre-accession funds in the framework of the reform of their judicial system and the fight against corruption,
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas the new pre-accession instrument IPA II should be more strategic, efficient and better targeted than its predecessors in order to achieve more sustainable results in improving the readiness of these countries for membership, and where possible favouring the sector approach in order to support comprehensive reform strategies of the beneficiary countries,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas since 2007 regional projects supporting cooperation between beneficiaries in different countries and horizontal projects addressing the shared needs of several beneficiaries are eligible for funding under IPA Multi-beneficiary Programmes,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Acknowledges that the Commission initiated a recovery procedure in February 2012 regarding two completed projects developed in Turkey, i.e. Construction of three Courts of Appeal Houses in Ankara, Erzurum and Diyarbakır1 and Support to the establishment of Courts of Appeal in Turkey2; takes note that EUR 21 767 205.29 was recovered in April 2012 and that the amount corresponds to the payments made by the Commission for both projects; notes that the Commission's decision for a full recovery was challenged both by the EU Delegation in Turkey and external evaluators; calls on the Commission to provide by December 2013 detailed information regarding this issue and explain the choice of a full recovery; __________________ 1 Project TR0501.07, EU contribution: EUR 22 500 000, Payments on 31/12/2012: EUR 20 559 457.71 2 Project TR0401.02, EU contribution: EUR 1 400 000, Payments on 31/12/2012: EUR 1 207 747.58
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Acknowledges that IPA 2007 project "Support to the capacities in the Ministries of Justice in Bosnia and Herzegovina for Strategies Planning, Aid Coordination and EU Integration" had its contract suspended; calls on the Commission to provide detailed information regarding the suspension of the contract and the state-of-play of the project by December 2013;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises the Commission's new approach to addressing justice reforms and home affairs issues early in the accession process; observes, however, that on average only 2.87 3.13% of the total EU pre- accession assistance envelope for the period 2007-2013 is devoted to the justice and only 0.52 % to the fight against corruption;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that the level of co-financing by domestic authorities differs widely from a country to another with Croatia and Turkey co-financing most of their projects and Serbia having all its projects fully covered by the EU pre-accession assistance; is of the opinion that co- financed projects, especially in the areas of the judiciary and the fight against corruption, brings a higher degree of ownership from the beneficiaries; calls therefore on the Commission to increase, under IPA II, the number of project co- financed by domestic authorities;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Regrets that the Commission does not have a tool to provide an execution rate in an automated manner for the EU pre- accession projects and emphasises that knowledge on execution rate is crucial in order to monitor the efficient implementation of projects and, therefore, in order to point out potential bottlenecks at an early stage; calls on the Commission to centralise data on a regular6 months basis on the execution rate of the projects for which EU pre-accession assistance is allocated;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes that cooperation on the reform of the judicial systems and the fight against corruption also takes place at the political level with country-specific structured dialogues on the rule of law and judiciary set up with candidate and candidate countries;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Underlines that the effectiveness of pre-accession projects implemented in the areas of the judiciary and the fight against corruption depends primarily on the authorities' political will to adopt and fully implement the reforms; deplores that in most candidate and potential candidate countries there is not strong political support for putting in place effective reforms regarding the fight against corruption and organised crime or fully independent judiciary; reminds that candidate and potential candidate countries receive EU pre-accession assistance in order to bring their legal systems, both the legislative framework and practice, in line with the European standards; (To be placed under the subheading "General remarks" but before the sub- subheading "Judicial reform")
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Welcomes those changes that place the legal and institutional framework more in line with the EU acquis, as well as the modernisation of the institutional setup of the judiciary; acknowledges for instance the positive impact brought by the introduction of the Case Management System (CMS) on the impartiality and efficiency of courts though its operationality and effectiveness are sometimes hindered by overambitious objectives such as in Kosovo; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Judicial reform")
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recallminding that the rule of law is the cornerstone of a democratic governance, stressesregime and a pre-condition for a functioning market economy and stresses the need to see judicial reforms in a wider context, insists on the fact that the justice system needs toshould be more predictable, efficient and fair in order to ensure thate trust of the people and of the business community trustin the judiciary; stresses in this contexrespect the need to establish the random distribution of cases acrossin all courts, to ensure a timely justice and congoingtinuous training of judges, prosecutors and clerks, and to ensure the unification of jurisprudence and the publication of all judicial decisions immediately after adoption, as well as e- justice;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalling that the rule of law is the cornerstone of democratic governance, stresses that the justice system needs to be morefully reliable, independent and predictable in order to ensure that the people and the business community trust the judiciary system ; stresses in this context the need to establish randomcoherent distribution of cases across allthe courts, and to ensure timely justice and ongoing, points out that adequate training of judges, prosecutors and clerks, and is essential, to ensure the unification and easy access of and tof jurisprudence and the publication of all judicial decisions immediately after adoption, as well as the wise use of e- justice;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Deplores the fact that the impact and sustainability of the EU financial assistance is largely held back by a lack of predictable justice system and predictable and sufficient domestic funding;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes that the "New Approach" intends to focus on these issues in the context of the accession negotiations;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Notes that corruption is a major challenge for the majority of candidate and potential candidate countries; is concerned that in several countries of the Western Balkans, Progress Reports note the linkages which were established between criminals, organised crime networks and political elites during the conflicts in the region and which have been carried over into today's societies; is deeply worried by the phenomenon of "state capture" which is present in some of those countries; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Fight against corruption")
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that genuine implementation and concrete results, in particular in the cases of high-level political corruption and corruption in the judiciary, are still a big challenge and that a convincing track record of cases of prosecution and conviction cases should be built up in order to measure the progress; stresses the need for a better planning and funding of anti- corruption work, based on a broad range of stakeholders; calls on the Commission to developfor a longer-term and broad-based strategic perspective of EU funding for cCivil sSociety oOrganisations which are working in the areas of transparency and anti-corruption areas; notes that the "New Approach" intends to focus on these issues in the context of the accession negotiations;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Is concerned that EU pre-accession assistance is not always used in a consistent manner due to the lack of a regional approach and strategy; underlines for instance that whereas in Croatia EU pre-accession assistance funded an anti-corruption Agency with investigative powers, it funded in Kosovo an anti-corruption Agency without such powers thus raising doubts on its efficiency; calls therefore on the Commission to establish a clear regional strategy in order to avoid funding contradictory models in candidate and potential candidate countries;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that pre-accession projects last on averagehave a time span of between one and 3.5 years; acknowledges, based on the external thematic evaluations, that such deadlines are challenging, if not overambitious, given the wide scope of somemost projects and their numerous often complicated components; given the complexity of reforms in the areas of justice and the fight against corruption, and the time consumed solely in pre programming activities, recommends that the Commission define priorities takes adequate measures within the framework of IPA II programming and projects that could benefit fromwhich would lead to a longer timescale (five to seven years), incorporating predetermined and periodical reviewing exercises which would allow for more flexible adjustments, including at the financial lenvel;ope
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Is further concerned that the complexity of pre-accession assistance rules and their rigidity whenever new activities need to be included in a project eventually create the counterproductive incentive to repeat an activity or to accept an unsatisfactory project design; is nevertheless of the opinion that the right balance between flexibility serving projects efficiency and the need to avoid irregularities and ensure best-value-for- money is still to be found and calls on the Commission to act in this respect under IPA II;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Is of the opinion that pilot activities should always be carried out in cases of broad projects prior to their full deployment in order to identify and mitigate potential shortcomings, limit avoidable delays and difficulties and measure the achievable results;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. NotesCalls on the Commission to ensure that a sectoral approach in the areas of judiciary reform and the fight against corruption would entail positive changes, such as enhancing donor coordination and ensuring better interaction between individual projects; calls, nevertheless, on the Commission to reassess itses are introduced in accordance with the Guidelines on Sector- Approach in Pre-Accession assistance and that the capacities of the beneficiary countries to draw up and implement meaningful sector strategies are enhanced; calls on the Commission to continue to provide guidance on the implementation of the sectoral -approach, given that in most candidate and potential candidate countries neither institutional set-up nor budgeting processes are at a level that will allow this approach to work and that a clear overall strategy and guidance at EU level are still lacking; during the planning and programming stages of IPA II, considers, that in most beneficiary countries neither institutional set-up nor budgeting processes are at a level suitable for sector budget support and calls on the Commission to promote the necessary institutional and procedural improvements in these countries;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Takes note that pre-accession projects are based on project fiches which present their overall and specific objectives, the foreseen activities to be implemented, their timeframe, costs and means of implementation and the indicators against which to measure the success of the projects;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Points out that Article 30 of the Financial rules applicable to the annual budget of the Union (Regulation No 966/2012 – Financial Regulation) requires SMART objectives to be established for all policy measures covered by the EU budget and be set out in the annual activity reports as part of the activity based budgeting and management processes;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Observes that project fiches have improved over time with the inclusion of more and better-designed SMART objectives, as well as specific indicators for the different components of a project; is, however, concerned that external evaluation has reported that some projects lacked focus because ofdue to inappropriate indicators, with SMART indicators not always suited to the justice sector; insists on the need for designing qualitative indicators capable of measuring the long- term impact of the projects; calls on the Commission to continue elaborating on guidance on the utilisation of performance indicators to be used for programming, monitoring and evaluation purposes for the 2014-20 financial framework in relation to IPA II; is of the opinion that specific indicators in the sector of Justice, Liberty and Security should be developed and used in line with the more strategic approach under IPA II;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that alongside support forto legislative reforms, infrastructure rehabilitation, construction, expansion andor upgrading and procurement of equipment and supplies, training is a core component of the EU pre-accession assistance; is of the opinion that high- quality training is a vital aspect for the sustainability of projects, butof judicial reforms and for projects' sustainability; underlines that over 30% of TAIEX activities are devoted to the areas of Justice, Freedom and Security; questions however the relevance of the objective indicators defined in the project fiches, which are used necessary to measure the added -value of training activities; points out that indicators such as ‘quality and quantity of training activities carried out by trainers’8 or ‘trained judicial advisors satisfied with the training’9 mainly focus on output and overlook outcomes; points out, for instance, that the fact that participants state in a questionnaire that training will influence their work is not in itself an impact indicator; calls, therefore, on the Commission to further fine-tune its training-related indicators and to organise a thorough impact assessment of the training activities implemented in the candidate and potential candidate countries;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Observes that support to legislative reforms is among the most common pre- accession projects; notes that institutional frameworks are now in line with the European standards but is concerned that the sustainability of those changes in laws and frameworks in candidate and potential candidates countries is at risk due to the lack of an overall strategy as noted by external evaluators; notes in particular that bylaws and complementary regulations are often missing, changes in roles and responsibilities are not made clear, and staff are not properly trained and thus cannot apply the new laws as intended; insists that support to the judiciary reform and the fight against corruption must be long-term and comprehensive with evaluation criteria covering the whole process from the production of new frameworks, laws, bylaws and regulations to the actual prosecution in high-level cases;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Notes that the performance and sustainability of multi-beneficiary programmes have not yet been evaluated; calls on the European Court of Auditors to include these projects in the scope of a future Special Report on the pre- accession assistance in candidate and potential candidate countries;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Acknowledges that the Commission assesses the impact and sustainability of pre-accession programmes through Results Oriented Monitoring (ROM) reports but regrets that those reports are not made publicly available; is of the opinion that the Commission's Progress Reports (PR) should reflect on ROM reports' findings and provide an assessment of the programmes and their impact implemented; urges therefore the Commission to introduce a chapter on including ROM conclusions in each PR; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Monitoring and evaluation")
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is concerned that ROM reports are considered to be structurally biased in favour of positive ratings and that they are inappropriate for longer-term performance monitoring; stresses that monitoring should track sector performance and not just project results; urges the Commission to develop a comprehensive monitoring action plan including evaluation tools other than ROM reports, such as sector performance assessment frameworks with SMART indicators, in order to make comprehensive monitoring of project outcomes possible over time; would like to be informed on progress made before the end of 2014;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Reminds the Parliament's call on the Commission to assess the impact and results achieved through the allocation of EU funds in the reform of the judiciary and the fight against corruption in candidate and potential candidate countries1; welcomes the publication by the Commission in 2012/2013 of an evaluation on Judiciary and Fundamental Rights in Turkey and an evaluation of Rule of Law, Judiciary Reform and Fight against Corruption and Organised Crime in the Western Balkans; regrets nevertheless that the evaluation on Turkey did not include a review of the projects related to the fight against corruption; __________________ 1 P7_TA(2011)0059, P7_TA(2011)0151, P7_TA(2011)0091
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Is aware that the European Court of Auditors is currently preparing a Special Report on EU pre-accession assistance in Serbia; strongly recommends to include projects implemented in the areas of the judiciary reform and the fight against corruption under the scope of the performance audit;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Notes the Commission's commitment to address these issues by 2015 through the publication of information on IPA assistance in line with the International Aid Transparency Initiative which established common standard for electronic publication of timely, comprehensive and forward-looking information on resources provided through development cooperation; emphasises that such initiative will only prove fruitful if information is regularly updated; enjoins therefore the Commission to update the database monthly as planned;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 a (new)
Subheading 9 a (new)
Country-related remarks (To be placed right after paragraph 20a(new))
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 b (new)
Subheading 9 b (new)
Albania (Sub- subheading to be placed right after subheading "Country-related remarks")
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Welcomes the improvements that the EU support has brought both in the legal and institutional framework and the infrastructure of the judiciary in Albania; is concerned, however about the insufficient reporting of results on the actual use, implementation and concrete impact of all these transformations; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Albania")
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Recognises the results in terms of adoption of strategic documents in the field of anti-corruption, is seriously concerned, however, about the low effectiveness of measures undertaken in the area; stresses that in 2012 Albania ranked as Europe's most corrupt country; calls on the Commission and the Albanian authorities to urgently reassess the implementation of anti-corruption strategy and action plans in this country;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 c (new)
Subheading 9 c (new)
Bosnia and Herzegovina (Sub- subheading to be placed after paragraph 20c(new))
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)
Paragraph 20 d (new)
20d. Deplores the lack of application of some of the enhanced capacities of the judiciary in Bosnia and Herzegovina; is concerned that, in its 2009 audit, the Court of Auditors noted the lack of funding for operations and maintenance of the acquired infrastructure entailing a risk that improvements will lack sustainability; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Bosnia and Herzegovina")
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 e (new)
Paragraph 20 e (new)
20e. Is seriously concerned about the limited performance of the anti- corruption agency in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the lack of reporting on the specific results of the EU funding in the area of fight against corruption;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 d (new)
Subheading 9 d (new)
Croatia (Sub- subheading to be placed after paragraph 20e(new))
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 f (new)
Paragraph 20 f (new)
20f. Notes the progress achieved by Croatia in some areas of judicial reform and their implementation while their sustainability was ensured through follow-up projects; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Croatia")
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 g (new)
Paragraph 20 g (new)
20g. Notes some positive developments in the field of fight against corruption presented in the annual Progress Reports for Croatia; is however concerned by risk that the measures adopted prior to the country's accession in the European Union are not irreversible and sustainable; underlines for instance that it is unclear which institution is in the leading position to oversee all the anti- corruption reforms, that the Commission on Conflict of Interest only saw its members appointed in early February 2013 casting doubts on its actual operability and results, and that politically-motivated nominations in ministries and supervisory board of companies are still ongoing and are in fact increasing;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 e (new)
Subheading 9 e (new)
Kosovo (Sub- subheading to be placed after paragraph 20g(new))
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 h (new)
Paragraph 20 h (new)
20h. Notes that due to the lack of control by the Pristina-based Kosovo authorities over the northern part of the territory, IPA projects such as the 'Legal Education System Reform' project which intended to cover all of Kosovo have generally had a negligible impact in the north; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Kosovo")
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 i (new)
Paragraph 20 i (new)
20i. Is seriously concerned that the EU assistance in Kosovo in the filed of rule of law has been found by the Court of Auditors as not sufficiently effective; recognises that specific circumstances in Kosovo: the low starting point for building up the rule of law and the insufficient priority accorded to this area by the Kosovo authorities, explain to a certain extent the limited effectiveness of the EU intervention; stresses, nevertheless, the existence of areas where improvement should be expected from the Commission and the EEAS: - Better definition of capacity building objectives and their link to concrete benchmarks against which progress could be assessed, - Better coordination of external and internal objectives, - Better coordination between EU institutions and their coordination with the Kosovo authorities and the international community, ensuring that EULEX operates with the full authorised number of staff and that they are deployed for the necessary time period and have the appropriate skills to be effective, and - Ensure that policy dialogues with Kosovo authorities focus particularly on strengthening the rule of law and are linked to incentives and priority conditions;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 j (new)
Paragraph 20 j (new)
20j. Is particularly concerned by the lack of tangible progress in the field of fight against corruption in Kosovo; considers the corruption is a major challenge and a serious obstacle in the functioning of the public institutions;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 f (new)
Subheading 9 f (new)
Macedonia (Sub- subheading to be placed after paragraph 20j(new))
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 k (new)
Paragraph 20 k (new)
20k. Welcomes the progress achieved in the legislative framework in judiciary reform and the positive changes in terms of efficiency and impartiality brought by the installation of the Automated Court Case Management Information System; recognizes Macedonia's active approach in reforming its Judiciary and its front- runner position in the area; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Macedonia")
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 l (new)
Paragraph 20 l (new)
20l. Is concerned that no reporting on the effectiveness of IPA projects on anti- corruption in Macedonia is available;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 g (new)
Subheading 9 g (new)
Montenegro (Sub- subheading to be placed after paragraph 20l(new))
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 m (new)
Paragraph 20 m (new)
20m. Welcomes the improvement of regional cooperation in the areas of the police and judicial cooperation, strengthening the legal framework required to ensure the independence of the judiciary and the enhancement of the efficiency of the judiciary in Montenegro; is concerned about weak donor coordination and low sustainability ratings of projects; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Montenegro")
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 n (new)
Paragraph 20 n (new)
20n. Notes that corruption is a serious concern in Montenegro; recognises the efforts undertaken by this state in fight against corruption and welcomes, in particular, the strengthening of Directorate for Anti-Corruption Initiative brought about by the EU funding;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 h (new)
Subheading 9 h (new)
Serbia (Sub- subheading to be placed after paragraph 20n(new))
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 o (new)
Paragraph 20 o (new)
20o. Is worried that independence of the judiciary remains a serious concern in Serbia especially because of the undue political influence; regrets further that the new legislation is neither consistently nor properly enforced thus putting at risk its efficiency; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Serbia")
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 p (new)
Paragraph 20 p (new)
20p. Welcomes the positive evaluation of the project "Support to the establishment of the Anti-Corruption Agency" and notably the fact that the project should have a significant impact on all the targets groups and the society in general; insists however on the need for a constant monitoring in order to ensure that political developments do not hinder the project;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9 i (new)
Subheading 9 i (new)
Turkey (Sub- subheading to be placed after paragraph 20p(new))
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 q (new)
Paragraph 20 q (new)
20q. Acknowledges that projects implemented in the area of the judiciary give reasonable evidence of sustainability and welcomes the political willingness from Turkish authorities to continue the reform process initiated as demonstrated by the increased budgetary allocation for judicial training; notes nevertheless a number of weaknesses in the design of projects such as the absence of baseline data and the lack of SMART indicators that need to be addressed in order to allow a proper assessment of the impact of the pre-accession projects; (To be placed after the sub- subheading "Turkey")
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 r (new)
Paragraph 20 r (new)
20r. Notes that in the area of the fight against corruption the EU financial assistance started quite recently with the 2006 Ethics for the Prevention of Corruption in Turkey; acknowledges from the Commission that no EU funds could be programmed prior to the establishment of an independent single anti-corruption body and the adoption of a National Anti- Corruption Strategy; notes that the aforementioned project is considered as moderately satisfactory but that it lacked SMART indicators;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to the European Commission's cCommunications on eEnlargement sStrategy and mMain cChallenges for the periodyears 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009- 2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012- 2013,