22 Amendments of Marie-Christine VERGIAT related to 2010/2308(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard, in particular, to Articles 6, 7, 8, 110(1), 11, 12, 21, 47-50, 52 and 523 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights,
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard, in particular, to Article 2 and Article 3(2) of the Treaty on European Union, and to Chapters 1, 2, 4 and 5 of Title V (Area of Freedom, Security and Justice) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16
Citation 16
– having regard to the relevant European and national constitutional court jurisprudence dealing with the criteria of proportionality and the need for it to be respected by public authorities in a democratic society,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Lisbon Treaty has therefore strongly anchoredprovides a stable framework for EU security policy to a specificin an EU rule of law, layingand lays the foundations for the development of a security agenda closely shared by the EU and the Member States and subject to change and to democratic oversight at European and national level; whereas the reinforcement of this policy must be based on the democratic values, public freedoms and fundamental rights recognised in various international texts;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas all security policy must include a prevention component, that this is particularly essential during a period in which economic and social inequalities are growing and jeopardise the effectiveness of fundamental rights;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas neither the Member States norand the Commission have not, as yet, envisaged any role for Parliament in this process, despite the entry into force of the Lisbon Treatydrawn the necessary consequences of the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, and consequently Parliament continues to play a marginal role in this process;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. welcomnotes the work undertaken in order to set up an ISS and the main principles underpinning the European Security Model as developed in the ISS, especially as regards thethe objective of reinforcing thed relationship between security, freedom and privacy and cooperation and solidarity between Member States;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that the ISS still has a security-based approach to the detriment of civil liberties and fundamental rights; deeply regrets the lapse between the declarations made in relation to the respect of values and principles and their taking into account in the formulation of policies; regrets in this regard the regular abuse of privacy and data protection including the conclusion of international agreements relating to sectoral security measures, for example EU PNR agreements with third countries; also emphasises the discrepancy between declared intentions relating to the participation of the various stakeholders, particularly NGOs and the situation in reality;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4.Takes note of Notes that the progress made by the Member States and the Commission in the context of the EU policy cycle with a view to implementing the general strategic objectives through actions based on intergovernmental cooperation at operational level; believes, however, that a clear division of tasks between the EU and national levels is necessary, that Parliament needs to be mainly concerns the operational level to the detriment of fundamental rights; believes, an in-depth assessment of the policy cycle should be undertaken with an evaluation report, including the imparct of the process and that an in-depth assessmsecurity policies on civil liberties and fundamental rights by the entd of the policy cycle should be undertaken in 2013June 2013 at the latest, Parliament needs to be part of the process ;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes the view that a comprehensive EU evidence- and knowledge-based analysis of the threats to be addressed is an essential prerequisite for an effective ISS, and is concerned that such EU-wide analysis is still lacking at presentEmphasises again its concern for the continued lack of a comprehensive and overall EU analysis of the security situation; reiterates therefore that the security situation relies mainly on the perception and appraisal of certain threats and that a comprehensive independent EU and national evidence- and knowledge-based analysis of security breaches carried out with the different stakeholders involved including academic communities working on the issue of secuity and NGOs working in AFSJ, is an essential prerequisite for an effective ISS based on the two aspects of preventing and combatting; highlights the need for additional efforts to improve the coherence and relevance of the information and data on which the threat assessments undertaken by EU bodies are based, including additional efforts to ensure transparency as regards the methodology used ;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. 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 of the EU Security Model and in evaluating these instruments, including through regular monitoring exercises on the implementation of the ISS, conducted jointly by the EP, national parliaments and the Council under Articles 70 and 71 TFEU and Article 6(2) of the Decision setting up the COSI; recalls therefore that Parliament’s role should not be limited to intervention by definition and even less so to a posteriori checks of the ISS which are necessary but insufficient;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the definition and the implementation of the ISS should focustake more closely on the indivisible linkfully into account the existing interaction between the internal and external dimensions of security policy, and that, in both of these dimensions, EU institutions and agencies active in the JHA field should perform their tasks in full compliance with EU law; the values and principles of EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights; calls on the Commission and the Member States also to assess the impact of the ISS on the EU External Security Strategy, including with regard to fundamental rights obligations;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Emphasises that the whole ISS, in the long-term, should concentrate more on the clear link between external threats and the lack or inefficient use of strategies and measures which could be a key component in preventing security threats such as targeted development assistance, strategies for reducing poverty or restoration programmes for natural or man-made disasters;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Takes note of the definition of five key areas for which different concrete actions have been proposed at EU and Member State level; takes the view that these objectives are not exhaustive, and that the order of priorities could have been better structured; observes that, while the fight against terrorism and organised crime is, and must remain, a key priority, it does not seem to be fully justified or appropriate to take action in fields suthe enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) which ais man-made disasters and the enforcement of intellectual property rightpart of a specific in- depth debate; recalls the necessity to ensure that non-intentional offences or the simple possession of certain devices are not criminalised in IPR and to guarantee Internet neutrality and free access to cultural goods within the framework of the ISS;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that further priority should be given to the fight against environmental, economic and corporate crime, impact of which is particularly detrimental to the living conditions of EU citizens, especially in times of crisi; regrets in this regard the measures taken by certain Member States aimed at weakening penalities for offences in these areas; also emphasises the discrepancy between proposals in these areas and the stigmatisation of certain less important crimes;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14.Is disappointed, in this connection, that the ISS still lacks a proper ‘justice dimension’, and believes that the establishment of a set of priorities in the field of judicial cooperation must be seen in the context of the close link between all the dimensions of the Area enshrined in Title V TFEU, namely the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice; emphasises the fundamental importance of mutual trust in encouraging judicial cooperation and emphasies that mutual trust can only be preserved through the establishment and maintenance of equal standards of civil liberties and procedural safeguards;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Is surprised that in its ISS report for 2011, the Commission continues to focus on Islamic terrorism as the main threat when a report by Europol refers to just three attacks linked to this movement out of a total of 249 (mainly by separatist movements) in the European Union in 2010;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Regards prevention of violent radicalisation as an important area of action for the ISS, but cCalls on the Commission and the Member States to re- assess the nature and level of this threat, including on the basis of recent events demonstrating the rise of violent political radicalism specifically targeting the values of equality and non-discrimination on which the EU is basedthreat arising from the resurgence of violent political radicalism and asks the Commission and the Member States to integrate this, including its prevention, in their areas of action;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17.Welcomes Is concerned about the focus on border security in the context of the ISS, but believ and proposals concerning the increased use of new technologies in border surveillance particularly with regard to the Smart Borders project; calls on the Commission in this regard to specify its intentions concerning its proposed increase to Frontex contributions for the use of data collected during operations; emphasises that border management and human mobility are not merely security issues, but key features of a wider political strategy involving not only the security dimension, but also – more importantly – immigration, asylum, development and employment policies respecting liberties and fundamental rights, particularly free movement and human dignity at EU level;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Notes the Commission Communication of 25 November 2011 on the first annual report on the implementation of the EU ISS1; emphasises that this Communication does little to criticise the action taken in this first year and reiterates the same priorities as in it's initial Communication of November 2010 on the EU ISS in action: five steps towards a more secure Europe2. __________________ 1 COM(2011) 790 2 COM(2010) 673
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Takes the view, therefore, that the ISS should further reflect the vision of the Stockholm Programme, and considers it expedient to undertake a parliamentary ‘mid-term’ review of the Stockholm Programme before the end of 2013 in order to assess its strategic, legislative and financial priorities; also takes the view that a complementary assessment is needed with regard to the relevant European agencies currently being ‘Lisbonised’ (Europol, Eurojust and the European Judicial Network), along with other agencies and bodies; recalls that the actions and operations carried out by the agencies must conform to the mandate defined by the decisions concerning their implementation and operation and respect the democratic values and principles and liberties and fundamental rights of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls that datathe processing and collection of personal data in the context of the ISS must always comply with EU data protection principles, particularly those of necessity, proportionality and legality, and with the relevant EU legislation and the relevant Conventions of the Council of Europe in this field;