7 Amendments of Cornelia ERNST related to 2010/2154(INI)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that any counterterrorism measure should therefore be in full accordance with the fundamental rights and obligations of the European Union, which are necessary in a democratic society and must be proportionate, strictly necessary, prescribed by law and thus delimited within the specific aim it wishes to achieve;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Urges in this regard for the aim to be achieved to be precisely and duly specified; calls for an extensive technical assessment to be carried out regarding the usefulness of body scanners; urges furthermore to prohibit the use of body scanners in case of any ambiguous or non-positive assessment;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Insists furthermore that body scanners should only be equipped with technology that does not enable any possibility of rendering full body images but merely standardised gender-neutral ‘stick figure’ images that are fully anonymised, and that noany data processing or data storage shouldmust not be possible;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls for periodic technical controls to be carried out by a competent organisation to review the devices' integrity and their compliance with the conditions laid out in paragraphs 4 and 5;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses that current security procedures at airports do not include full searching of the body;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that any proposal to allow the deployment and use of body scanners as a permissible screening method should be extensively justified in an impact assessment covering inter alia the fundamental rights aspect of body scanners, especially with a view to the principles of proportionality and necessity, and the possible health risks, taking into account the opinions of the European Union, international and national human rights and data protection authorities, such as the EDPS, the FRA and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Protection of Human Rights while Countering Terrorism;