BETA

Activities of Luigi BERLINGUER related to 2014/2006(INI)

Shadow opinions (1)

OPINION on the evaluation of justice in relation to criminal justice and the rule of law
2016/11/22
Committee: JURI
Dossiers: 2014/2006(INI)
Documents: PDF(135 KB) DOC(308 KB)

Amendments (14)

Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Citation 2 a (new)
– having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Citation 3 a (new)
– having regard to the activities, annual reports and studies of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights,
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Citation 3 b (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 3 July 2013 on the situation of fundamental rights: standards and practices in Hungary (pursuant to the European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2012),
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Citation 4 a (new)
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0000/2014),
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital A
A. whereas the 2013 Justice Scoreboard focuses exclusively ondeals with civil, commercial and administrative justice, which are of importance for the European Semester as regards boosting competitiveness and growth, but does not cover criminal justice, which has no direct economic impact and is, according to the Treaties, to a much greater extent a national responsibility;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the Justice Scoreboard is currently dealt with in the context of the European economic semester, thus over- emphasising the economic value of justice; whereas justice is a value in itself and should be accessible to all irrespective of economic interests;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
B. whereas any evaluation of criminal justice should take account of the prerogatives of the Member States and national law in this area, and remain within the bounds of the Union’s responsibility for coordination only; whereas any value judgment regarding national criminal justice systems should be avoided;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Recital C
C. whereas the independence of the judiciary and the justice system should be respected, and the legislative and executive branches of government should therefore exercise the utmost care when assessing their performance in the field of civil, commercial and administrative justice and also criminal justice;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Recital E
E. whereas the principle of the rule of law should not be reduced to a question of judicial efficiency in the field of criminaljudicial efficiency in the field of criminal law is an important element of the principle of the rule of law;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Calls on the Commission and the European Parliament to fully respect the limits on EU competences in the area of criminal justice;deleted
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that any future extension of the scope of the Justice Scoreboard should be carried out in accordance with the Treaties and in consultation with the European Parliament and the Member States;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines that the true aim of the Justice Scoreboard is to compile and compare statistical data with the aim of helping Member States to develop their national judicial systems; stresses, therefore, that the comparison of data in the field of criminal justice is a complex operation in view of the considerablacknowledges the sensitivity of criminal justice and therefore calls on the European Commission to undertake any further extension of the scope of the Justice Scoreboard in close cooperation with the European Parliament and the Member States, bearing in mind the differences existing between national justice systems, and that criminconsidering that some goals such as impartial justice cannot always be assessed using statistically quantifiable parametersd the quality of justice cannot be measured easily;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Draws attention to the role of the Council of Europe in collating data and promoting best practice with regard to criminal justice and the rule of law, and believes that duplication of work should be avoided; in this respect, notes also the work of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights in this area and believes that any evaluation undertaken by the European Commission should be complementary;
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the rule of law is a widecomplex concept which requires that the actions of public bodies comply with the legal framework laid down by national constitutions and the laws and regulations deriving therefrom, and should not be reduced to a criminal law issue; takes the view that the assessment of criminal justice systems alone does not permit blanket conclusions to be drawn regarding compliance with the principle of the rule of law; stresses, therefore, that any evaluation of criminal justice should not be connected to a possible new rule- of-law mechanism.
2014/02/03
Committee: JURI