Activities of Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY related to 2012/2185(DEC)
Reports (1)
REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2011 PDF (166 KB) DOC (88 KB)
Amendments (6)
Amendment 1 #
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ...Grants the Director of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2011;
Amendment 4 #
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ...Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the financial year 2011;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that in 2012, there were three cases dealt by the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding whistleblowing and labour disputes in the Aallegation of psychological harassment, rejection of an application for a post and a non-extension of a contract of an agencyt, and that on 6 July 2011, the Ombudsman opened Case 0917/2011/ (PMC) EIS, which is based on allegations regarding one of the whistleblowerfailure to investigate properly the complainant's allegations of psychological harassment and incorrect storage of documents;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that in one of thethe first cases referred to in paragraph 4, the European Union Civil Service Tribunal decided in favour of the applicant (judgement of 18 September 2012 in Case F-58/10, Timo Allgeier v European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights) which annulled the Agency's decision of 16 October 2009 and ordered it to pay legal fees and damages to Mr Allgeierdamages to the applicant and the costs), while in the second case F- 112/10 (Cornelia Trentea v European Agency for Fundamental Rights) the Tribunal decided in favour of the Agency; in case F-38/12 (BP v European Agency for Fundamental Rights) judgement is pendingjudgement of 11 December 2012) the Tribunal decided in favour of the Agency, after which the applicant lodged an appeal; in case F-38/12 a judgement is pending, however, the Court dismissed the application for interim measures in this case by its order of 14 June 2012;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is concerned by the factNotes that in December 2012, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) opened an investigation into alleged irregularities in the Agency as a result of allegations made by one of the applicants in the above-mentioned court cases; requests that the Agency inform the discharge authority on the results of both the OLAF investigation and the Ombudsman case;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that on 12 and 14 December 2012, the Agency presented to its Executive Board and to its Management Board the draft rules on whistleblowing; notes that the decision was taken to adopt those rules formally after consultation with the Commission services; notes that in the meantime, the Agency followsadopted the principles of the Commission guidelines; calls on the Agency to inform the discharge authority wheon the rules will be adoptedimplementation of the rules;