Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | LIBE | IN 'T VELD Sophia ( ALDE) | |
Committee Opinion | AFET | HANKISS Ágnes ( PPE) | Sabine LÖSING ( GUE/NGL) |
Committee Opinion | JURI | DE GRANDES PASCUAL Luis ( PPE) | |
Committee Opinion | TRAN | ||
Committee Opinion | IMCO | ||
Committee Opinion | ECON |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 307 votes to 259 with 54 abstentions, a resolution on the EU Counter-Terrorism Policy: main achievements and future challenges. The resolution adopted in plenary was tabled by the ALDE, S&D et Greens/EFA groups and replaced the draft resolution prepared on the basis of the report by Sophia IN 'T VELD (ADLE, NL).
Parliament recalls that after the attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the ‘War on Terrorism’, especially with regard to the U.S. approach. Since then, severe terrorist attacks on EU soil, including the 2004 terrorist attacks in Madrid and the 2005 attacks in London, have had a significant impact on the sense of common security among EU citizens. The Europol 2011 EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT 2011) indicates that the threat of terrorist attacks in the EU remains serious, even though there is a decreasing trend of terrorist attacks claimed or attributed to separatist terrorist organisations as compared with 2006.
The resolution also stresses that terrorism has taken new forms such as cyber–terrorism, and terrorist networks have become more complex in structure, means and financing, making terrorism a matter affecting the security of the whole EU and not just the national security of Member States.
Accordingly, a common EU approach is needed since terrorists make use of European diversity in laws and anti-terrorism capabilities and the abolition of border controls when committing their acts.
General considerations : whilst welcoming the Commission Communication, Parliament regrets that its scope is rather narrow , is limited to the implementation of agreed policy measures and does not cover national counter-terrorism policies or national measures that transpose policies agreed at European or international level. Parliament stresses the importance of a consistent approach on terrorism and organised crime. Furthermore, the Communication does not give a clear idea how the measures interact and where there are overlaps or gaps since European, national and international measures are complementary.
Parliament feels that assessing individual measures does not provide a complete picture of the impact of counter-terrorism policies in Europe. It emphasises the need for the European Union, its Member States and its partner countries to base their strategy for combating international terrorism on the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights, aiming for prevention, and the promotion of dialogue, tolerance and understanding among different cultures, civilisations and religions.
Members recall that counter-terrorism policies should meet the standards set with regard to necessity, effectiveness, proportionality, civil liberties, the rule of law and democratic scrutiny and accountability, giving priority to respecting the rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Parliament highlights the most effective measures to fight against terrorism, including the following:
· restrictive measures to seize, confiscate or freeze assets and funds linked to natural or legal persons and organisations,
· prevention, tracking and prosecution of terrorist activities based not on emergency norms but on a coherent, necessity-founded strategy, and avoiding duplication of measures;
· deepen and develop the four main strands of the counter-terrorism strategy – prevent, protect, pursue and respond;
· the reinforcement of judicial and police cooperation at EU level, coupled with full parliamentary scrutiny
· training and awareness-raising among judicial and police authorities.
Parliament invites the Commission to fully assess the set of counter-terrorism policies and measures adopted and focus on future challenges. The Commission is also asked to consider the need for uniform standards for obtaining evidence and conducting investigations, full implementation of joint investigation teams, a stronger EU framework for judicial and police training, and proper inclusion and integration policies. Counter-terrorism measures must be commensurate with the threat level and that they must be adjusted in response to both an increase and a decrease in threat level.
Parliament also recalls the important contribution of many NGOs and civil society, often co-financed by the EU and its Member States, towards socio-economic development, peace building, nation building and democratisation, all essential in countering radicalisation and recruitment, which are the most significant and continuous long-term threats.
Comprehensive strategy : Parliament calls for the creation of a comprehensive strategy on the interconnection between international organised crime, drug trafficking and terrorism, and encourages continuous analysis of new trends and traits in diversification, radicalisation and recruitment, and those related to the role of international non-governmental organisations in terrorism financing. It calls on the Commission and the Member States to prevent the rise of extremism by investment in anti-racism policies and develop strategic partnerships with countries outside Europe including the US.
Underlining that counter-terrorism is an integral part of the Union's relations with third countries, it asks for an increase in the funding of counter-terrorism assistance measures in the next Instrument for Stability in order to prevent state failure and agrees, in this respect, with the priority areas being South Asia, in particular Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Sahel region (Mauretania, Mali, Niger), Somalia and Yemen. It also insists on the importance of defining a uniform set of standards for the specific support of victims of terrorism.
Evaluation and mapping exercise : Parliament stresses that a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies should focus on examining whether the measures taken to prevent and combat terrorism in the EU have been evidence-based (and not based on assumptions), and part of a comprehensive EU counter-terrorism strategy, based on an in-depth and complete appraisal , to be carried out in line with Article 70 of the TFEU. The Commission should report back to a Joint Parliamentary Meeting of the European Parliament and national parliamentary committees.
Parliament also advocates a holistic and comprehensive approach to counter-terrorism policy in the form of alignment of the European Security Strategy and the Internal Security Strategy and a strengthening of existing coordination mechanisms between Justice and Home Affairs Council structures, agencies and the European External Action Service. It stresses that good intelligence is crucial and that the EU is uniquely well placed to facilitate intelligence-sharing among Member States provided there is a proper legal base for such cooperation.
Members call on the Commission to produce a full evaluation, including at least the following items:
· a clear analysis of the response to the terrorist threat, based on the definition laid down in Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism, as well as of the framework of counter-terrorism measures to address this threat in terms of effectiveness, gaps in security, prevention, prosecution and increased security in Europe, including the effectiveness of the EU agencies and the proportionality thereof;
· facts, figures and trends relating to terrorist activity and counter-terrorism activity;
· a full overview of the accumulated impact of counter-terrorism measures on civil liberties and fundamental rights, measures by third countries with a direct impact in the EU and all measures taken in this field in connection with external relations, as well as the case law of the ECHR, the European Court of Justice and national courts.
The Commission is also asked to:
· draw up a complete and detailed map of all existing counter-terrorism policies in Europe;
· carry out a comprehensive evaluation on national counter-terrorism policies, with a particular focus on interaction with EU policies, overlap and gaps;
· produce a full and detailed report on all resources spent by the EU, the EU Member States and private companies on measures with counter-terrorism objectives, directly or indirectly, including those measures specifically aimed at counter-terrorism activities, at IT counter-terrorism related staff, systems and databases, at the protection of fundamental rights and data protection, democracy and the rule of law, at funding counter-terrorism related research, and on the development of the relevant EU budget lines since 2001;
· ascertain whether counter-terrorism measures are being implemented properly and to report regularly to the Parliament and the Council on its findings;
· carry out a study into the costs of counter-terrorism policies borne by the private sector, as well as an overview of sectors benefiting from counter-terrorism policies.
Democratic scrutiny and accountability : Parliament calls on the Commission to carry out a study to establish if counter-terrorism policies are subject to effective democratic scrutiny , including a detailed assessment establishing if either national parliaments or the European Parliament had full rights and the means of scrutiny.
Parliament also stresses that the proportionality principle must be taken into account and the fundamental rights of citizens be observed. It looks forward to the conclusions of the Parliament Committee follow-up report on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA, and stresses that the EU must help the U.S. in finding appropriate solutions to the issues of closing Guantánamo.
In this context, Parliament urges the Council and the Commission, when revising the blacklisting and asset-freezing measures, to consider particularly the position of NGOs and civil society so as to ensure that NGOs are not listed ‘by association’ and that they are not unduly hampered in working with their partner organisations.
Parliament is aware of the Commission appeal against the General Court judgment in the latest case of Kadi v. Commission and calls on all actors to carry out a thorough revision of the sanctions regime and ensure it is fully in line with international human rights standards and the rule of law. It takes the view that those targeted by sanctions should be given the information that substantiates their targeting and be entitled to effective judicial remedy .
Monitoring and profiling : Parliament urges the Commission to conduct a compulsory proportionality test and a full impact assessment for each proposal involving the large-scale collection of personal data, detection and identification technologies, tracking and tracing, data mining and profiling, risk assessment and behavioural analysis or similar techniques. It underlines the fact that the collection of data should only be allowed in accordance with the principle of necessity , and calls on the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Fundamental Rights Agency to report on the level of protection of fundamental rights and personal data in the field of EU Counter-Terrorism Policy.
Members also suggest the following measures:
clarifying fully the division of labour between the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator and the High Representative; launching proposals for strengthening the protection of civil liberties, transparency and democratic scrutiny in the context of counter-terrorism policies, such as improving access to documents by creating an EU Freedom of Information Act ; amendments to the Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism, with a view to raising the standard of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, inter alia by updating the definition of terrorist offences; a uniform legal definition of the concept of ‘profiling’ ; a proposal for a legislative framework for data protection, including the Common Foreign Security Policy, on the basis of Article 16 of the TFEU.
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted the own-initiative report drafted by Sophia in 't VELD (ADLE, NL) on the EU Counter-Terrorism Policy: main achievements and future challenges in response to the Commission communication on the same subject.
The committee highlighted that according to the Europol 2011 EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT 2011), the threat of terrorist attacks in the EU remains serious, and that the links between terrorism and organised crime appear to be growing, and points to the fact that there is a decreasing trend of terrorist attacks claimed or attributed to separatist terrorist organisations as compared with 2006, although they still account for the majority of overall terrorist attacks in the EU.
Although the Members welcome the Commission Communication, they regret that its scope is rather narrow at European level. They stress the importance of a consistent approach, at EU and Member State level, to initiatives adopted in the field of internal security, with particular reference to terrorism and organised crime. They deplore the fact that the Communication does not sufficiently cover and develop in greater detail the measures taken by DGs other than JLS (such as TRAN, ENTER or MARKT) and regret that the opportunity was missed to explain how certain EU counter-terrorism instruments such as data retention, PNR and the Swift Agreement fit into the EU counter-terrorism strategy.
Members emphasise the need for the EU, its Member States and its partner countries to base their strategy for combating international terrorism on the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights. The Union’s external actions to combat international terrorism should in the first place be aimed at prevention, as well promoting dialogu e, tolerance and understanding among different cultures, civilisations and religions.
The report considers that prevention, tracking and prosecution of terrorist activities are critical policies at EU level and must be part of a systematic approach based not on emergency norms but on a coherent, necessity-founded strategy , must be purpose- and cost-effective and must avoid duplication of measures and function creep on the part of competent institutions, agencies and bodies. It considers the decision to deepen and develop the four main strands of the counterterrorism strategy – prevent, protect, pursue and respond – to be a good one.
Members believe that prevention, investigation and prosecution of terrorist activities should be based on the reinforcement of judicial and police cooperation at EU level, coupled with full parliamentary scrutiny and full and timely completion of the roadmap for a high-level set of uniform procedural guarantees . T raining and awareness-raising among judicial and police authorities must be a priority in order to improve readiness across the European Union in the fight against terrorism.
The Commission is invited to fully assess the set of counter-terrorism policies and measures adopted and focus on future challenges, including the reform of Europol and Eurojust in the light of the new potentialities offered by the Lisbon Treaty, the need for uniform standards for obtaining evidence and conducting investigations , full implementation of joint investigation teams, a stronger EU framework for judicial and police training, and proper inclusion and integration policies.
According to Members, counter-terrorism measures must be commensurate with the threat level and that they must be adjusted in response to both an increase and a decrease in threat level.
The report recalls that radicalisation and recruitment pose the most significant and continuous long-term threat and thus constitute the axis on which the EU must focus its counter-terrorism prevention strategies at the very beginning of the chain. It calls for the creation of a comprehensive strategy on the interconnection between international organised crime, drug trafficking and terrorism .
On an international level , the report underlines that counter-terrorism is an integral part of the Union’s relations with third countries. It asks for an increase in the funding of counter-terrorism assistance measures in the next Instrument for Stability in order to prevent state failure. Members agree, in this respect, with the priority areas being South Asia, in particular Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Sahel region (Mauretania, Mali, Niger), Somalia and Yemen.
Evaluation by a panel of independent experts and mapping exercise : Members stress the need for a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies and on the need to report back to a Joint Parliamentary Meeting of the European Parliament and national parliamentary committees responsible for overseeing counter-terrorism activities.
Any evaluation should, inter alia :
p rovide a clear input and output analysis of the terrorist threat based on an agreed definition at EU level, as well as of the framework of counter-terrorism policies in Europe in the past decade to address this threat; set out the facts and figures, including the budget funding allocated, relating to terrorist activity (successful, failed and prevented attacks) and counter-terrorism activity (arrests and convictions); include a full overview of the accumulated impact of counter-terrorism measures on civil liberties and fundamental rights; examine whether the current instruments for assessing the impact on privacy and civil liberties are adequate; examine how effective and proportionate the powers entrusted to EU agencies and services are in the fight against terrorism; identify how counter-terrorism measures can be improved in cases where there are gaps in security which can be abused for the purposes of carrying out terrorist acts.
The Commission is called upon to: (i) map out which measures have objectives other than counterterrorism, or where further objectives were added to the initial purpose of counter-terrorism (mission creep and function creep), such as law enforcement, immigration policies, public health or public order; (ii) draw up a complete and detailed map of all existing counter-terrorism policies in Europe , with a special focus on EU legislation and how it has been transposed and implemented at EU level; (iii) produce, before March 2012, a full and detailed report on all EU funds used for counter-terrorism purposes, directly or indirectly; (iv) carry out a study into the costs of counter-terrorism policies
borne by the private sector, as well as an overview of sectors benefiting from counterterrorism
policies.
Democratic scrutiny and accountability : Members call on the Commission to carry out a study to establish if counter-terrorism policies are subject to effective democratic scrutiny. The evaluation must include an overview of the legal basis used for each policy measure as well as all existing measures must be subjected to a retrospective proportionality test. Other elements include an overview of the classification of documents, trends in the use of classification, and numbers and trends in access granted or denied to documents relating to counterterrorism policies; an overview of measures adopted by third countries with extraterritorial effect in the EU; an overview of non-legislative EU-funded) activities, such as research programmes, and how they are subject to democratic scrutiny.
Members consider that the EU and its Member States must fully clarify their role in the CIA programme of renditions and black sites . The report stresses that the EU must help the U.S. in finding appropriate solutions to the issues of closing Guantanamo and ensuring its inmates receive a fair trial. In this context, Members urge the Council and the Commission, when revising the blacklisting and asset-freezing measures, to consider particularly the position of NGOs and civil society so as to ensure that NGOs are not listed "by association" and that they are not unduly hampered in working with their partner organisations.
Members firmly disapprove of the call by the Council for on the Commission and the Member States to lodge appeals against the General Court judgment in the latest case of Kadi v. Commission. They call on all actors to carry out a thorough revision of the sanctions regime and ensure it is fully in line with international human rights standards.
Monitoring and profiling : Members urge the Commission to conduct a compulsory proportionality test and a full impact assessment for each proposal involving the large-scale collection of personal data, detection and identification technologies, tracking and tracing, data mining and profiling, risk assessment and behavioural analysis or similar techniques. They call on the Commission to incorporate a uniform legal definition of the concept of ‘ profiling’ .
The report calls on the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator to draw up a report on the use of human intelligence and its cooperation with foreign intelligence services in European counter-terrorism policies.
Lastly, Members call on the Commission to propose amendments to the Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism, amended last in 2008, with a view to raising the standard of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, inter alia by updating the definition of terrorist offences, and to link it better to the existing EU-level Human Rights instruments, particularly the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Commission should put forward a proposal for a legislative framework for data protection, including the Common Foreign Security Policy.
The Council discussed and welcomed the latest discussion paper on the implementation of the EU Counter-terrorism Strategy, presented by the EU Counter-terrorism Coordinator (see Council document 10622/1/11 ).
In his discussion paper on the EU Counter-terrorism Strategy, the EU Counter-terrorism Coordinator analyses the consequences for the fight against terrorism of Osama Bin Laden's death, and the counter-narrative against Al Qaeda's ideology. He also looks at the risks and opportunities deriving from the recent developments in North Africa and the continuous challenges the international community faces in Pakistan.
The paper then focuses on a number of key challenges in relation to the following issues:
prevention - developing a vision and countering the terrorist narrative; transport security (including land transport such as high-speed trains); security related research and an industrial policy for the security industry; and the strategy on chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear security (CBRN).
OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN DATA PROTECTION SUPERVISOR (EDPS).
The EDPS recalls that by building on the structure of the 2005 EU Counter- Terrorism Strategy, the Communication first analyzes the four major strands of EU Counter-Terrorism Policy: prevent, protect, pursue and respond.
The areas of ‘prevention’ and ‘protection’ are the most delicate ones from a data protection perspective, for various reasons:
(1) these areas are by definition based on prospective risk assessments, which in most cases trigger a broad and ‘preventive’ processing of vast amounts of personal information on non-suspected citizens (such as, for example, internet screening, e-borders and security scanners);
(2) the Communication envisages increasing partnerships between law enforcement authorities and private companies (such as internet service providers, financial institutions and transportation companies) with a view to exchange relevant information and sometimes to ‘delegate’ to them certain parts of law enforcement tasks. This entails an increased use of personal data, collected by private companies for commercial purposes, for the use by public authorities for law enforcement purposes;
(3) ‘preventive’ use of personal data is more likely to lead to discrimination. The preventive analysis of information would entail the collection and processing of personal data relating to broad categories of individuals (for example, all passengers, all internet users) irrespective of any specific suspicion about them. The analysis of these data — especially if coupled with data-mining techniques — may result in innocent people being flagged as suspects only because their profile (age, sex, religion, etc.) and/or patterns (for example, in travelling, in using internet, etc) match those of people connected with terrorism or suspected to be connected.
The EDPS welcomes the attention that the Communication pays to fundamental rights and data protection, and recommends further concrete improvements in the area of counter-terrorism policy.
The EDPS recommends supporting with concrete initiatives the respect of fundamental rights in this area, and in particular of the right to the protection of personal data. It also supports the approach that systematic policy making in this area should be preferred to incident-driven policy-making. In this perspective, it recommends the EU institutions to ensure that policies and initiatives in the area of home affairs and internal security are designed and implemented in a way which will ensure a consistent approach and clear links between them, providing for appropriate and positive synergies, and avoiding duplication of work and efforts.
Against this background, EDPS recommends the EU legislator to step up the role of data protection, by committing to specific actions (and deadlines), such as:
assessing the effectiveness of existing measures while considering their impact on privacy is crucial and should vest an important role in European Union's action in this area. when envisaging new measures, considering possible overlapping with already existing instruments , taking into account their effectiveness, and limiting the collection and exchange of personal data to what is really necessary for the purposes pursued; proposing the establishment of a data protection framework applicable also to the Common Foreign and Security Policy ; proposing a comprehensive and global approach to ensuring, in the area of ( asset-freezing ) restrictive measures, both the effectiveness of the law enforcement action and the respect for fundamental rights, on the basis of Article 75 TFEU; putting data protection at the heart of the debate of the measures in this area, by ensuring for example that Privacy and Data Protection Impact Assessments are carried out and competent data protection authorities are timely consulted when relevant proposals in this area are put forward; ensuring that data protection expertise is fed into the security research at a very early stage, so as to guide policy options and to ensure that privacy is embedded to the fullest possible extent in new security-oriented technologies ; ensuring adequate safeguards when personal data are processed in the context of international cooperation , while promoting the development and implementation of data protection principles by third countries and international organisations.
PURPOSE: to define the outlines of the EU Counter-Terrorism Policy.
CONTENT: the 2005 EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy (Doc No 14469/4/05), which continues to be the main reference framework for EU action in this field, consists of four strands: prevention, protection, pursuit and response. This Communication follows that same structure. For each of the four strands some major achievements have been highlighted and future challenges identified.
The main purpose of the communication is to propose a series of actions with a view to meeting future challenges in regard to counter-terrorism . These actions may be summarised as follows:
1. Prevention: the main challenge under this strand is preventing radicalisation and recruitment leading to the willingness to commit terrorist offences. But prevention also includes dealing with the way terrorists use the internet – for communication, fund-raising, training, recruitment and propaganda. The Commission intends to:
identify more accurately the most effective ways of combating radicalisation and recruitment by assessing the effectiveness of national policies that have been put in place and reliable indicators developed to provide data to assist with that assessment ; the launch a Communication in 2011 which will look at the experience that has been gathered in countering radicalisation and recruitment linked to terrorism in the Member States . This will provide the basis for reviewing and updating the existing EU Strategy and Action Plan; find and put in place the most effective approaches for dealing with use of the internet for terrorist purposes by supporting the efforts of the Member States' law enforcement authorities to deal with illegal internet content in this context. Public private partnerships will need to be enhanced as well.
2. Protection: protecting people and infrastructure is by far the broadest area of the strategy. It covers a wide range of activity, including EU-wide threat assessments, security of the supply chain, protecting critical infrastructure, transport security and border controls, as well as security research. The proposed actions are as follows:
the revision of the Directive on Critical Infrastructure to assess its impact and the need to include other sectors, e.g. the ICT sector; the revision of the action plan on the security of explosives; the enhancement of transport security, notably through deployment of new technologies to defeat the efforts by terrorists to escape detection (e.g. by using liquid explosives or non-metallic materials). While respecting fundamental rights, there is a need to ensure the security of passengers; the taking forward of the issue of standardisation and certification of security solutions (e.g. detection technology), as part of efforts to develop a European industrial security policy. An EU-wide process for testing and trialling security solutions, as well as a system of mutual recognition of certification results, should be put in place; strengthen the links between public sector users - including law enforcement practitioners - the research community, and technology providers and industry in order to ensure an effective security research policy and, by doing so, contribute to a high level of security.
3. Pursuit: this strand covers issues such as information gathering and analysis, impeding terrorists' movements and activities, police and judicial cooperation, and combating terrorist financing. The Commission’s main proposals are the following:
the evaluation of existing instruments so as to allow Member States' authorities to exchange the information necessary to prevent and combat terrorist offences while ensuring full respect for the right to privacy and data protection rules; the determination of the right way to establish a European policy for the use of passenger name records (PNR) data to combat terrorism and organised crime; the creation of a framework for the adoption of administrative measures, such as the freezing of funds or financial assets belonging to, or owned by, natural or legal persons, groups or non-State entities, on the basis of Article 75 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU; the adoption of EU legislation on investigation techniques which are particularly relevant for investigating and preventing terrorist crimes. This issue may be tackled by way of a legislative proposal for a comprehensive regime on obtaining evidence in criminal matters based on the principle of mutual recognition and covering all types of evidence , which the Commission will prepare in 2011; the joint establishment of a methodology based on common parameters for analysing threats at European level.
4. Response: this strand brings together issues such as civilian response capacity to deal with the aftermath of a terrorist attack, early warning systems, crisis management in general and assistance to victims of terrorism. The Commission proposes:
the evaluation of EU civil protection policy; the evaluation of ways of reinforcing coordination and cooperation to facilitate consular protection, notably during crises; strengthening the EU's role in crisis and disaster management, in particular by developing the EU rapid response capacity based on existing instruments for humanitarian aid and civil protection ; giving priority to the implementation of the CBRN Action Plan; considering the introduction of a legislative proposal to provide a comprehensive instrument on the protection of victims, including victims of terrorism , in 2011; ensuring that the implementing arrangements of the new solidarity clause, introduced in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Article 222), are established quickly.
A number of horizontal issues are also dealt with, including respect for fundamental rights, cooperation with external partners in the field of combating terrorism, and funding of this policy . On this last aspect, the Commission recalls that most of this policy was covered by the programme Security and Safeguarding Liberties, which includes the specific programme for prevention, preparedness and consequence management of terrorism and other security-related risks and the programme for prevention of and fight against crime (for the period 2007-2013, a total amount of EUR 745 million has been made available). The Commission will make proposals on funding for the post-2013 period in the context of the next multi-annual financial framework and will consider the feasibility of setting up an Internal Security Fund .
In conclusion, the Commission notes that the Counter-Terrorism Strategy of 2005 has proved its worth in bringing together and encouraging the implementation of a broad array of actions and instruments which have contributed significantly to combating terrorism at the EU level. The new institutional framework offers the Union an unprecedented opportunity to better interlink its different counter terrorism instruments, as well as the internal and external dimension. A study to make a more detailed evaluation of the current policies and priorities is needed in order to support all key players at EU level – Council, Parliament, Commission – with a common vision and understanding of the future priorities in the counter-terrorism field.
PURPOSE: to define the outlines of the EU Counter-Terrorism Policy.
CONTENT: the 2005 EU Counter-Terrorism Strategy (Doc No 14469/4/05), which continues to be the main reference framework for EU action in this field, consists of four strands: prevention, protection, pursuit and response. This Communication follows that same structure. For each of the four strands some major achievements have been highlighted and future challenges identified.
The main purpose of the communication is to propose a series of actions with a view to meeting future challenges in regard to counter-terrorism . These actions may be summarised as follows:
1. Prevention: the main challenge under this strand is preventing radicalisation and recruitment leading to the willingness to commit terrorist offences. But prevention also includes dealing with the way terrorists use the internet – for communication, fund-raising, training, recruitment and propaganda. The Commission intends to:
identify more accurately the most effective ways of combating radicalisation and recruitment by assessing the effectiveness of national policies that have been put in place and reliable indicators developed to provide data to assist with that assessment ; the launch a Communication in 2011 which will look at the experience that has been gathered in countering radicalisation and recruitment linked to terrorism in the Member States . This will provide the basis for reviewing and updating the existing EU Strategy and Action Plan; find and put in place the most effective approaches for dealing with use of the internet for terrorist purposes by supporting the efforts of the Member States' law enforcement authorities to deal with illegal internet content in this context. Public private partnerships will need to be enhanced as well.
2. Protection: protecting people and infrastructure is by far the broadest area of the strategy. It covers a wide range of activity, including EU-wide threat assessments, security of the supply chain, protecting critical infrastructure, transport security and border controls, as well as security research. The proposed actions are as follows:
the revision of the Directive on Critical Infrastructure to assess its impact and the need to include other sectors, e.g. the ICT sector; the revision of the action plan on the security of explosives; the enhancement of transport security, notably through deployment of new technologies to defeat the efforts by terrorists to escape detection (e.g. by using liquid explosives or non-metallic materials). While respecting fundamental rights, there is a need to ensure the security of passengers; the taking forward of the issue of standardisation and certification of security solutions (e.g. detection technology), as part of efforts to develop a European industrial security policy. An EU-wide process for testing and trialling security solutions, as well as a system of mutual recognition of certification results, should be put in place; strengthen the links between public sector users - including law enforcement practitioners - the research community, and technology providers and industry in order to ensure an effective security research policy and, by doing so, contribute to a high level of security.
3. Pursuit: this strand covers issues such as information gathering and analysis, impeding terrorists' movements and activities, police and judicial cooperation, and combating terrorist financing. The Commission’s main proposals are the following:
the evaluation of existing instruments so as to allow Member States' authorities to exchange the information necessary to prevent and combat terrorist offences while ensuring full respect for the right to privacy and data protection rules; the determination of the right way to establish a European policy for the use of passenger name records (PNR) data to combat terrorism and organised crime; the creation of a framework for the adoption of administrative measures, such as the freezing of funds or financial assets belonging to, or owned by, natural or legal persons, groups or non-State entities, on the basis of Article 75 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU; the adoption of EU legislation on investigation techniques which are particularly relevant for investigating and preventing terrorist crimes. This issue may be tackled by way of a legislative proposal for a comprehensive regime on obtaining evidence in criminal matters based on the principle of mutual recognition and covering all types of evidence , which the Commission will prepare in 2011; the joint establishment of a methodology based on common parameters for analysing threats at European level.
4. Response: this strand brings together issues such as civilian response capacity to deal with the aftermath of a terrorist attack, early warning systems, crisis management in general and assistance to victims of terrorism. The Commission proposes:
the evaluation of EU civil protection policy; the evaluation of ways of reinforcing coordination and cooperation to facilitate consular protection, notably during crises; strengthening the EU's role in crisis and disaster management, in particular by developing the EU rapid response capacity based on existing instruments for humanitarian aid and civil protection ; giving priority to the implementation of the CBRN Action Plan; considering the introduction of a legislative proposal to provide a comprehensive instrument on the protection of victims, including victims of terrorism , in 2011; ensuring that the implementing arrangements of the new solidarity clause, introduced in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Article 222), are established quickly.
A number of horizontal issues are also dealt with, including respect for fundamental rights, cooperation with external partners in the field of combating terrorism, and funding of this policy . On this last aspect, the Commission recalls that most of this policy was covered by the programme Security and Safeguarding Liberties, which includes the specific programme for prevention, preparedness and consequence management of terrorism and other security-related risks and the programme for prevention of and fight against crime (for the period 2007-2013, a total amount of EUR 745 million has been made available). The Commission will make proposals on funding for the post-2013 period in the context of the next multi-annual financial framework and will consider the feasibility of setting up an Internal Security Fund .
In conclusion, the Commission notes that the Counter-Terrorism Strategy of 2005 has proved its worth in bringing together and encouraging the implementation of a broad array of actions and instruments which have contributed significantly to combating terrorism at the EU level. The new institutional framework offers the Union an unprecedented opportunity to better interlink its different counter terrorism instruments, as well as the internal and external dimension. A study to make a more detailed evaluation of the current policies and priorities is needed in order to support all key players at EU level – Council, Parliament, Commission – with a common vision and understanding of the future priorities in the counter-terrorism field.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2012)162/2
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0577/2011
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0286/2011
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0286/2011
- Committee opinion: PE462.602
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE464.701
- Committee opinion: PE460.613
- Committee draft report: PE460.953
- Document attached to the procedure: OJ C 056 22.02.2011, p. 0002
- Document attached to the procedure: N7-0038/2011
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2010)0386
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2010)0386
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2010)0386 EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: OJ C 056 22.02.2011, p. 0002 N7-0038/2011
- Committee draft report: PE460.953
- Committee opinion: PE460.613
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE464.701
- Committee opinion: PE462.602
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0286/2011
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2012)162/2
Activities
- Jan Philipp ALBRECHT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Roberta ANGELILLI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Elena BĂSESCU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Simon BUSUTTIL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Martin EHRENHAUSER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bruno GOLLNISCH
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ágnes HANKISS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Anna HEDH
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Teresa JIMÉNEZ-BECERRIL BARRIO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Petru Constantin LUHAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Andreas MÖLZER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Siiri OVIIR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jaroslav PAŠKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Hannes SWOBODA
Plenary Speeches (1)
Amendments | Dossier |
282 |
2010/2311(INI)
2011/03/28
JURI
14 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Regrets that the opportunity was missed to explain how certain EU counter- terrorism instruments such as data retention, PNR and the Swift Agreement fit into the EU counter- terrorism strategy;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls in addition, as far as counter- terrorism measures are concerned, for the proportionality principle to be taken into account and the fundamental rights of citizens to be observed, bearing in mind that all such measures have to be in accordance with the law and the rule of law;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to disclose where the cooperation with third countries does not comply with the acquis and why there is a need to go beyond;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls, by virtue of the subsidiarity principle, for the national parliaments to play an active role regarding the area of freedom, security, and justice, especially for the purposes of evaluation and implementation of Union policies, as provided for in Article 70 of the TFEU; considers that they should also be involved in the political monitoring of Europol and the evaluation of Eurojust activities, in accordance with Article 12(c) of the TEU;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls on the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Council to quickly implement arrangements for the solidarity clause introduced by the Lisbon Treaty;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Calls for more accurate assessment to be brought to bear on the counter- terrorism measures already taken, extending also to fundamental rights and budgetary aspects;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Considers the decision to deepen and develop the four main strands of the counter-terrorism strategy – prevent, protect, pursue and respond – to be a good one; wonders at the same time whether different kinds of terrorism such as organised terrorism and "lone wolves" would not need specific approaches;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Is aware that all measures that lead to prosecution may at the same be preventive measures and is therefore concerned by the delay in implementing Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and calls on the Commission to assess the implementation of Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Deplores the fact that there is no Mediterranean equivalent of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, in which governments could discuss issues and strategies related to security and the prevention of terrorism; calls on the Member States and the Commission to consider the possibility of setting up equivalent machinery of this kind within the Union for the Mediterranean;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4c. Calls on the Commission and Council to encourage positive and negative conditionality in relation to national, regional, and local governments, should they fail to contribute effectively to counter-terrorism; calls on the Commission to ascertain whether counter-terrorism measures are being implemented properly and to report regularly to Parliament and the Council on its findings;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that terrorism is a phenomenon that is constantly evolving and should be met by a counter-terrorism policy that can address this fact; welcomes in this respect the measures adopted recently in the field of aviation safety
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Considers also that the best possible balance must invariably be achieved between, on the one hand, the obligation incumbent on public authorities, at EU level and in Member States, to protect their citizens from injury and guarantee their security and, secondly, the need to safeguard their individual rights;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Recalls Parliament’s important role in preventing and combating terrorism and related activities, such as the financing of terrorism;
source: PE-462.596
2011/05/02
LIBE
224 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 a (new) - having regard to the 2003 European Security Strategy1 and its implementation report of 20082, 1 A Secure Europe in a Better World - The European Security Strategy, Approved by the European Council held in Brussels on 12 December 2003 and drafted under the responsibilities of the EU High Representative Javier Solana 2 Report on the Implementation of the European Security Strategy - Providing Security in a Changing World S 407/08
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital -A (new) -A. whereas the fight against terrorism remains a top priority for the EU, as number of attacks take place on Europe's territory every year,
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Believes that prevention, investigation and prosecution of terrorist activities should be based on the reinforcement of judicial and police cooperation at EU level, coupled with full parliamentary scrutiny and full and timely completion of the roadmap for a high level set of uniform procedural guarantees;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 d (new) 3 d. Invites the Commission to define a uniform set of standards for the protection of and the specific support to victims of terrorism, including in the framework of criminal proceeding, foreseeing also measures to ensure the protection of witnesses;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 e (new) 3 e. Reiterates that the forthcoming revision of EU data protection legislation should extend to judicial and police cooperation the high level standards now ensured by Directive 95/46/EC, doing away with the current lack of sufficient guarantees; this process should also lead to define a data protection framework for data protection applicable to CFSP in accordance with Article 16 TFEU and Article 39 TEU;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 f (new) 3 f. Reaffirms that restrictive measures, particularly the freezing of assets, can be useful as a counter-terrorism tool but they will have to be based on the new Article 75 TFEU and fully compliant with the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Takes the view that EU counter- terrorism policies lack coherence, are mainly a collection of ad hoc measures, and are often incident driven; underlines that the evaluation of ten years of EU counter-terrorism policies should result in clearly defined policy objectives;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Points out that excessive emphasis on counter-terrorist policies may be counterproductive and lead to a climate of fear and distrust, as well as providing terrorists with a pretext to fight "the enemy"; calls on greater restraint and greater efforts for de-escalation;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3 c. Points out that in the context of counter-terrorism policies a vast, permanent apparatus of government and intergovernmental bodies has been created for the fight against terrorism; notes that the counter-terrorism apparatus has become a major employer in the public sector; is concerned that maintaining the apparatus will become a goal in itself; calls on Commission and Council to make provisions for winding down the apparatus at that time when the terrorist threat fades and disappears;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Urges the Commission and the Council to provide for measures to seize, confiscate or freeze assets and funds linked to natural or legal persons and organisations involved or implicated in terrorist acts, in accordance with Article 75 of the TFEU;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Regards the internet, and information and communications technology in general, as essential resources when it comes to taking preventive measures to protect the public, prosecuting terrorists and responding effectively to possible terrorist attacks;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas after the atrocious attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the ‘War on Terrorism’, especially with regard to the US approach
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 2 Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies must provide the basis for an evidence-based, needs-driven, coherent and comprehensive EU counter-terrorism strategy by means of an in-depth and complete appraisal to be carried out by a panel of independent experts reporting back to a Joint Parliamentary Meeting of the European Parliament and national parliamentary committees responsible for overseeing counterterrorism activities within six months after the study is commissioned, drawing upon reports to be requested from relevant organisations and agencies such as Europol, Eurojust, the Fundamental Rights Agency, the European Data Protection Supervisor, the Council of Europe and the United Nations;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that a
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies must provide the basis for an evidence-based, needs-driven, coherent and comprehensive EU counter-terrorism strategy
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies must provide the basis for an evidence-based, needs-driven, coherent and comprehensive EU counter-terrorism strategy by means of an in-depth and complete appraisal to be carried out by a
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies must provide the basis for an evidence-based (and not based on allegations), needs- driven, coherent and comprehensive EU counter-terrorism strategy by means of an in-depth and complete appraisal to be carried out by a panel of independent
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that a proper evaluation of ten years of counter-terrorism policies must provide the basis for an evidence-based, needs-driven, coherent and comprehensive EU counter-terrorism strategy by means of an in-depth and complete appraisal to be carried out by
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. analyse the significance of the current media culture, including that of social media, both in transmitting terrorists’ propaganda and as a channel for influencing action against terrorism;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. recognise the principal future challenges to European action against terrorism, such as cyber-terrorism and the risks of marginalisation and radicalisation associated with hostile discourse concerning immigration and with the growth of youth unemployment;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Include a complete and detailed ‘map’ of all counter-terrorism policies in Europe; calls at the same time on Member States to carry out a comprehensive evaluation of their counter-terrorism policies, with a particular focus on interaction with EU policies, overlap and gaps, to cooperate better in the evaluation of EU policies, and to provide their input within the given deadlines, as in the case of the Data Retention Directive8 ; __________________ 8. Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15th March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC. Official Journal of the European Union L 105 (Brussels: 13th April 2006) pp. 54-63.
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point a a. provide a clear
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point a a. provide a clear input and output analysis of counter-terrorism policies in Europe in the past decade and set out clearly the results of the policies in terms of effectiveness, prevention, prosecution and increased security in Europe;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point a a. provide a clear input and output analysis
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point b b. set out the facts and figures relating to terrorist a
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point b b. set out the facts and figures relating to terrorist activity (successful, failed, prevented attacks), terrorist prevention and counter-terrorism activity (arrests and convictions
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point b b. set out the facts and figures relating to terrorist activity (successful, failed, prevented attacks) and counter-terrorism activity (arrests and convictions);stresses that such figures have to be verifiable and subject to cross-examination;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point b b. set out the facts and figures relating to terrorist activity (successful, failed, prevented attacks) and counter-terrorism activity (arrests and convictions), should all the necessary data be available for the Commission;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point b b. set out the facts and figures, including the budget funding allocated, relating to
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point c Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas after the atrocious attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the ‘War on Terrorism’, especially with regard to the US approach; whereas although the attacks did not take place on European soil, but the planning and preparations took place partially in Europe, all Europeans felt them to be an attack on their values and their way of life,
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point c Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point c c. include a full overview of the accumulated impact of counter-terrorism measures on civil liberties, including Member State policies and measures by third countries with a direct impact in the EU quantified at least in terms of discrimination statistics and violations of civil liberties found in the relevant case law of the ECHR, ECJ and national courts;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point c c. include a full overview of the accumulated impact of counter-terrorism measures on civil liberties, including Member State policies and measures by third countries with a direct impact in the EU and all measures taken in this field under the neighbourhood policy;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point c c. include a full overview of the accumulated impact of counter-terrorism measures on civil liberties, taking into consideration their added value in guaranteeing the security of citizens, including Member State policies and measures by third countries with a direct impact in the EU;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point c c. include a full overview of the accumulated impact of counter-terrorism measures on
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point d d
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point d d. examine whether the current instruments for assessing the impact on privacy and civil liberties are adequate and based on international benchmarking practices implemented by democratic countries;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point d d. examine whether the current instruments for assessing the impact on privacy and civil liberties are adequate taking into account the interinstitutional agreements and further activities on better lawmaking;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point d d. examine whether the current instruments for assessing the impact on privacy and
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point d a (new) d a. include results from monitoring the major actions of the anti-terrorist structures in the Member States and examine whether these actions really reciprocate emerging threats or ambiguously serve short-term internal political purposes;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas after the atrocious attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the ‘War on Islamic Terrorism’, especially with regard to the US approach; whereas although the attacks did not take place on European soil, all Europeans felt them to be an attack on their values and their way of life in the name of the appalling ideology of Islam,
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point e e. identify where
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point e e. identify where further law enforcement powers are needed
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point e e.
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point e e. lay down an objective definition with regards to the ‘necessary’ law enforcement powers and based on that definition identify where further law enforcement powers are needed or, inversely, where the powers granted are excessive and go beyond what is necessary;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point e e. identify where further law enforcement powers are needed or, inversely, where the powers granted are excessive and go beyond what is necessary to obtain that objective;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point e a (new) e a. identify how counter-terrorism measures can be improved in cases where there are gaps in security which can be abused for the purposes of executing terrorist acts;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas after the atrocious attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the ‘War on Terrorism’, especially with regard to the US approach; whereas although
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Calls on the Commission to take measures to combat terrorist acts through internet, taking into account that terrorist groups use internet and in particular the social networks as a communication channel to reach younger generations for propaganda purposes;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the Commission to draw up a complete and detailed ‘map’ of all counter- terrorism policies in Europe, with a special focus on EU legislation and how it has been transposed and implemented at national level; calls at the same time on Member States to carry out a comprehensive evaluation of their counter- terrorism policies, with a particular focus on interaction with EU policies, overlap and gaps, to cooperate better in the evaluation of EU policies
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the Commission to assist the activities of the panel of experts by drawing up a complete and detailed ‘map’ of all counter-
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the Commission to draw up a complete and detailed ‘map’ of all existing counter-
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Calls on the Commission to establish as soon as possible a European Passenger Name Record in order to offer better monitoring of crime routes to and from the EU, with full respect on the protection of personal data of travellers. Considers that it is important to increase the international cooperation and to take measures in order to enhance transport security across Europe with a particular emphasis on air cargo security;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Suggests that the Commission - involving the appropriate agencies - prepares an analysis detailing those political forces, interest groups or organizations which could extend their spheres of influence through the European Parliament and using it as a facilitator to weaken and attack the credibility of European counter-terrorism structures and mechanisms jeopardising thus the security of European citizens;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Commission to produce
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Commission to produce, before July 2011, a full and detailed report on all EU funds used for counter-terrorism purposes, directly or indirectly, and to produce an analysis of the development of the relevant EU budget lines since 2001, also specifying the resources allocated to this area by third countries;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas after the atrocious attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the ‘War on Terrorism’,
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Commission to produce, before July 2011, a full and detailed report on all EU funds used for counter-terrorism purposes, directly or indirectly, and to produce an analysis of the development of the relevant EU budget lines since 2001, including in any case the following items: - expenditures specifically labelled as counter-terrorism measures, - expenditures for policies that include counter terrorism activities, - expenditures for EU staff and agencies carrying out counter terrorism tasks, - expenditures for counter terrorism related IT systems and databases, - expenditures for research projects (co- )funded by the European Union in the area of counter terrorism or related areas, - expenditures for protection of fundamental rights and data protection in the context of counter terrorism, - expenditures for strengthening democracy and the rule of law, - an analysis of the development of the above EU budget lines since 2001;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Calls on the Commission to carry out a study into the costs of counter-terrorism policies borne by the private sector, delineating the shares borne by the different sectors of society, as well as an overview of sectors benefiting from counter-terrorism policies;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point a Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point b Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point b Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point b Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas after the atrocious attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point b b. all existing measures must be subjected to a retrospective proportionality test
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point c Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point c Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point c c. provide an overview of the classification of documents
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point d d
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point e e. an overview of the instruments for the democratic scrutiny of cross-border cooperation by intelligence agencies
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point f Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point f f. an overview of measures adopted by third countries with extraterritorial effect in the EU,
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point g Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point h Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas after the atrocious attacks of 11 September 2001 the first decade of the 21st century has been marked by the ‘War on Terrorism’, especially with regard to the US approach; whereas although these attacks did not take place on European soil, all Europeans felt them to be an attack on their values and their way of life,
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 – point h a (new) h a. to proceed to the analysis of the mechanisms that limit personal rights, and which are used in the prevention and combat of terrorist activities (such as telephone-tapping, illegal detentions, or kidnappings within the territory of the Member States);
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Calls
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Calls on the Commission to investigate and rectify unlawful action and violations of international law and human rights, in case there is any evidence or suspicion of such alleged violation and in case the Commission is authorized to carry out such investigations;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Calls on the Commission to investigate
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Calls on the Commission to investigate and rectify any unlawful action and violations of international law and human rights;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. calls on the Commission to include in its forthcoming directive on compensation for victims of crime a chapter specifically stressing both the significance of the victims of terrorism for Europe and enhancing protection for the victims of mafia-organised crime;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12 a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to guideline an improvement of media coverage and the emphasis on victims of terrorism when counter- terrorism activities are being reported;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Considers that the EU and its Member States must fully clarify their role in the CIA programme of renditions and black sites, in line with the recommendations of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe; in light of new evidence brought to light since then, calls on Member States to reopen independent national inquiry procedures to fully disclose civilian or military illegal activities which took place on European ground and airspace in the context of President Bush's "War on Terror"; further urges Member States to, according to the results of those inquiry procedures, to repair and compensate victims in the appropriate manner;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Considers that the EU and its Member States must fully clarify their role in the CIA programme of renditions and black sites, in line with the recommendations of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe; moreover, emphasizes that the EU and EU Member States must clarify whether judicial inquiries into issues relating to Guantanamo and to renditions have been cancelled at the request of third countries;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) A a. whereas the 2005 EU Counter- Terrorism Strategy and the EU Strategy for Combating Radicalisation and Recruitment to Terrorism still did not reach their objective of preventing terrorism,
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Considers that the EU and its Member States must fully clarify their role in the CIA programme of renditions and black sites, in line with the recommendations of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe; insists that the Member States must fully collaborate with further investigations into the matter;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Considers that the EU and its Member States must fully clarify their role in the CIA programme of renditions and black sites, in line with the recommendations of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe, strictly based on facts and not prejudices and political interests;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13 a. Underlines that the EU must help the US in finding appropriate solutions for the closing of Guantanamo and ensuring the inmates get a fair trial;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13 b. Calls on Commission and Council, when designing counter terrorism measures, to respect the following essential rights: the right to associate and form organizations, the right to operate without unwanted state interference, the right to free expression, the right to communicate and cooperate freely internally and externally, the right to seek and secure resources, and the right to have these freedoms protected by the state;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 c (new) Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Is of the opinion that the EU and its Member States must modify the procedures regarding the inclusion of persons or entities in terrorist lists, and make sure they are fully in line with all relevant court rulings10
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Is of the opinion that the EU and its Member States must modify the procedures
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Recalls the important contribution of many NGOs and civil society, often co- financed by the EU and its Member States, towards socio-economic development, peace building, nation building and democratisation, all essential in countering radicalisation and recruitment;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 – having regard to Council Framework Decision on combating terrorism 2002/475/JHA1 as amended by Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA2
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) A a. whereas Member States and EU citizens have been subject to terrorist attacks which have led to significant injury and loss of life; whereas the threat of terrorism within the EU remains considerably high,
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission and the Council to open an investigation into the possible collection of personal data for law enforcement purposes without an adequate legal base or by applying irregular, or even illegal, procedures; hopes that that investigation will enable as complete a list as possible to be compiled of the data collection measures implemented under the circumstances described above;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission and the Council to
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission and the Council to
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission within its competencies and the Council to
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15 a. Calls upon the Commission to incorporate a uniform legal definition of the concept of ‘profiling’ in the upcoming revision of the Union’s data protection framework;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Urges the Commission to
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Underlines the need to improve the use of data: the collection of data should only be allowed after the principle of necessity, the possible overlap with other existing measures and possible less intrusive measures have been explicitly demonstrated, and only on the basis of strict purpose limitation, data minimization, and when sharing and processing of data are drastically improved;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Fundamental Rights Agency to report
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) A a. whereas, the European Union has been an increased target and victim of terrorism in the 21st century, and faces an ever present threat,
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Fundamental Rights Agency to report annually on
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Fundamental Rights Agency to report annually on profiling, data mining and detection and identification techniques used in Europe and countries with which the European Union has concluded or intends to conclude agreements in this area for counter-terrorism (and possibly other) purposes, such as combating organised crime;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Fundamental Rights Agency to report annually on profiling, data mining and detection and identification techniques used
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Fundamental Rights Agency according to their mandate to report annually on profiling, data mining and detection and identification techniques used in Europe for counter-terrorism (and possibly other) purposes;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Counter-Terrorism Coordinator to draw up a report on the use of Human Intelligence and its cooperation with foreign intelligence services in European counter-terrorism policies;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Calls on the Council to follow the example of the United Nations by appointing a coordinator on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas terrorism is not a recent phenomenon, in the recent decades terrorist networks have become more complex in structure, means and financing, thus making the terrorist threat all the more complex; whereas counter- terrorism has always been part of regular law enforcement action; whereas 9/11 led to a fundamental change in the international security paradigm and, coupled with the 2004 Madrid and the 2005 London attacks, led to the development in the methods and instruments used to fight terrorism; whereas terrorism became a matter of national and international security, with a very
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls on the Commission to launch proposals for strengthening the protection of civil liberties, transparency and democratic scrutiny in the context of counter-terrorism policies
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20 a. Calls on the Commission to propose amendments to Council Framework Decision on combating terrorism amended last in 2008 to raise the standard of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely by updating the definition of terrorist offences and to better link it to the existing EU-level Human Rights instruments, particularly the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20 a. while ensuring transparency and democratic scrutiny related to counter- terrorism policies, due consideration must be given to the fact that disclosure of information may put human lives in danger and derail counter-terrorism activities;
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20 a. Calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for a legislative framework for data protection including as well the Common Foreign Security Policy on the basis of Article 16 TFEU without prejudice to the specific rules laid down in Article 39 TEU
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas terrorism is not a recent phenomenon; whereas
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas terrorism is not a recent phenomenon; whereas counter-terrorism has
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas terrorism is not a recent phenomenon; whereas counter-terrorism
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas terrorism is not a recent phenomenon; whereas terrorism has taken new forms such as cyber terrorism; whereas terrorism and organised crime are often interlinked; whereas counter- terrorism has always been part of regular law enforcement action; whereas 9/11 led to a fundamental change in the methods and instruments used to fight terrorism; whereas terrorism became a matter of national security, with a very different legal framework,
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas terrorism is not a recent phenomenon; whereas counter-terrorism has always been part of regular law
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas terrorism is not a recent phenomenon; whereas counter-terrorism has always been part of regular law enforcement action; whereas 9/11 led to a fundamental change in perception of the terrorist phenomenon and in the methods and instruments used to fight terrorism; whereas terrorism became not only a matter of national security but one of global security, with a very different legal framework,
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. Recalls that there is no definition of terrorism which is unambiguous and universally accepted, which hampers discussion concerning terrorism and how to combat it; observes that the characteristic features of terrorism are generally regarded as comprising premeditated acts of violence with political aims, mostly directed against civilians.
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 5 a (new) - having regard to the Europol EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report for 2011 (TE-SAT 2011),
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) B a. whereas although the experiences of terrorism as well as threat levels are varying across the EU Member States, a common EU-approach is needed since terrorist operations often are pan- European and terrorists make use of European diversity in laws, anti-terrorism capabilities and the abolition of border controls when committing their acts,
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) B a. whereas the public nature of terrorist victimisation and the targeting of civilians and non combatants requires a public response based on solidarity with victims and special attention to their needs,
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) B a. whereas EU citizens and other persons also want their safety and security guaranteed within the EU and elsewhere and the EU has an important role to play in this regard,
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of the European Union’s counter-terrorism polic
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be to undermine the objectives of terrorism, which are to destroy the fabric of
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the primary objective of counter-terrorism policies should be to prevent, avoid and combat terrorist activities and spare lives of innocent people; whereas the aim of counter- terrorism policies should be to undermine the objectives of terrorism, which are to destroy the fabric of our free, open and democratic society; whereas the aim of counter-terrorism must be on the long term to protect and strengthen that fabric of democratic society
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be to undermine the objectives of terrorism, which
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be to undermine the objectives of terrorism, which
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be to undermine the objectives of terrorism and the execution of terrorist acts, which are to destroy the fabric of our free, open and democratic society and to identify the parties responsible for perpetrating terrorism; whereas the aim of counter-terrorism must be to protect and strengthen that fabric of democratic society and to guarantee the security of citizens and the effectiveness of counter-terrorism policies must be measured against th
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 9 a (new) - having regard to the 1983 Council of Europe Convention on the Compensation of Victims of Violent Crimes (CETS No. 116), the 2005 Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism (CETS No. 196), the 2005 Council of Europe Guidelines on the Protection of Victims of Terrorist Acts and the 2006 Council of Europe Recommendation (2006) 8 on Assistance to Crime Victims,
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be to undermine the objectives of terrorism, which are to destroy the fabric of our free, open and democratic society; whereas the aim of counter-terrorism must be to protect and strengthen that fabric of democratic society and the effectiveness of counter-terrorism policies must be measured against this aim; whereas in this logic, strengthening civil liberties and democratic scrutiny is not an obstacle to such policies, but
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be to undermine the objectives of terrorism, which are to destroy the fabric of our free, open and democratic society; whereas the aim of counter-terrorism must be to protect and strengthen that fabric of democratic society and the effectiveness of counter-terrorism policies must be measured against this aim; whereas in this logic, strengthening civil liberties and democratic scrutiny is not an obstacle to such policies,
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the aim of counter-terrorism policies should be to
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) C a. whereas the European Union’s counter-terrorism strategy should address not only the consequences of terrorism but also its causes,
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) C a. whereas terrorism is a State problem, and it is therefore the task of democratic institutions to draw up and preserve the main lines of counter-terrorism policy in a search for the widest possible political and social consensus; the democratic fight against terrorism, necessarily within the bounds of the constitutional state and the rule of law, is a matter for all the political parties represented in democratic institutions, whether they be in government or opposition; this makes it advisable to preserve the definition of the counter-terrorism policy, according to which it is in any democratic society a matter for governments, arising from the lawful confrontation between political parties and thus from electoral competition,
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) C a. whereas terrorist acts seriously jeopardise human rights, threaten democracy, aim to destabilise legitimately constituted governments, undermine pluralistic civil societies and challenge the ideals of everyone to lead a life free from fear,
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas ten years after the
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas ten years after the attacks that shook the world it is time to take stock of the achievements in fighting terrorism; whereas evaluation allows for more efficient and effective policy-making, and in any modern democracy policy decisions
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 11 a (new) - Having regard to Article 1 of the European Council Common Position of 27 December 2001 on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism,
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) D a. whereas terrorist attacks have repeatedly aimed at causing mass causalities, challenging available institutional capacities,
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D b (new) Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D c (new) D c. whereas the general overview of the 2010 EU Terrorism Situation and Trend report of Europol (TE-SAT 2010) indicates a decreasing trend of terrorist attacks claimed or attributed to separatist terrorist organisations, while still covering the majority of overall terrorist attacks in Europe;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) D a. whereas remarkably little has been done to assess to what degree EU counter- terrorism policies have achieved the stated objectives; whereas the European Parliament has repeatedly called for a thorough evaluation of EU counter- terrorism policies as evaluation and assessment are preconditions for transparency and accountability of policy makers; whereas the absence of proper evaluation of EU counter-terrorism policies is mainly due to the fact that a large part of it is conducted in the area of intelligence and security policies, where there is a tradition of secrecy,
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas accountability and responsibility are essential factors for the democratic legitimacy of counter-terrorism policies, whereas mistakes, unlawful actions and violations of international law and human rights law must be investigated and
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas accountability and responsibility for the policies carried out are essential factors for the democratic legitimacy of public action in general and whereas that principle likewise holds good for counter-terrorism policies, whereas mistakes, unlawful actions, and violations of international law and human rights must be investigated and corrected, and justice must be done,
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas accountability and responsibility are essential factors for the democratic legitimacy of counter-terrorism policies, whereas, in case there is any suspicion or evidence, mistakes, unlawful actions and violations of international law and human rights must be investigated and corrected, and justice be done,
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) E a. whereas defending the victims of terrorism and their rights should be part of the Union’s priority policies; whereas the Institutions must promote public recognition of the victims and help raise European citizens’ awareness of their importance,
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) E a. whereas counter-terrorism means countering all forms of terrorism, including cyber terrorism, narcoterrorism and the interconnectability of terrorist groups with and within multiple criminal operations, and the tactics it uses to be operational such as illegal funding, political lobbying, financial extortion, money laundering and the disguising of terrorist groups operations through assumed legal entities or institutions,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital -A (new) -A. whereas jihadist, separatist and anarchist terrorism is a common and real threat throughout the European Union,
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas counter-terrorism measures
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas counter-terrorism measures tend to have a profound impact on civil liberties, the rule of law and democratic decision-making; whereas these measures are increasingly implemented by the private sector, which is not bound by the same requirements as law enforcement authorities in terms of respect of procedural rights and accountability; whereas counter-terrorism measures also have a substantial budgetary impact and a growing share of the costs in this field is borne by the private sector,
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas the approach of counter terrorism is driven more by emotions and assumptions than by facts and evidence; whereas counter-terrorism measures tend to have a profound impact on civil liberties, the rule of law and democratic decision-making; whereas these measures also have a substantial budgetary impact and a growing share of the costs in this field is borne by the private sector,
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas counter-terrorism measures
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) F a. whereas severe terrorist attacks on EU soil since the 9/11 attacks in the United States, including the 2004 terrorist attacks in Madrid and the 2005 attacks in London have had a significant impact on EU's sense of common security among its citizens,
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) F a. whereas it is reasonable to measure the costs and benefits of counter terrorism policies as policy makers should know if their decisions have the desired impact, and citizens have a right to hold their elected representatives to account,
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas mass surveillance has become a key feature of counter-terrorism policies, and whereas the large-scale collection of personal data, detection and identification technologies, tracking and tracing, data mining and profiling, risk assessment and behavioural analysis are all used for the purpose of preventing terrorism; whereas
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas mass surveillance has become a key feature of counter-terrorism policies, and whereas the large-scale collection of personal data, detection and identification technologies, tracking and tracing, data mining and profiling, risk assessment and behavioural analysis are all used for the purpose of preventing terrorism; whereas public authorities are making more and more effective use of data collected for commercial or private purposes,
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital - A a (new) -A a. whereas all terrorism is one and the same thing and its objective is none other than to destroy the foundations of our free and democratic society; whereas its actions may be publicised and disseminated among our citizens and achieve its purpose of undermining their belief in rights protection systems, in which criminals are seen as victims and the Member States’ ability to respond to terrorist acts is restricted,
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas mass surveillance, including video surveillance, has become a key feature of counter-terrorism policies, and whereas the large-scale collection of personal data, detection and identification technologies, tracking and tracing, data mining and profiling, risk assessment and behavioural analysis are
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas mass surveillance has become a key feature of counter-terrorism policies, and whereas the large-scale collection of personal data, detection and identification technologies, tracking and tracing, data mining and profiling, risk assessment and behavioural analysis are all used for the purpose of preventing terrorism; whereas public authorities are making more and more use of data collected for commercial or private purposes; whereas, therefore, in the name of fighting terrorism civil liberties and fundamental rights are systematically violated,
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) G a. whereas terrorist groups have increased their international cooperation; whereas with the constantly developing web-based technologies there is a need of a new system of technological measures to prevent using internet as an easy tool for communication between terrorist groups,
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) G a. whereas the damages to the life of victims, family and friends can not be translated in numbers nor statistics and whereas the search for justice and restoring dignity should be a vital part in EU counter-terrorism policies, but which is all too often left behind,
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) G a. whereas public authorities are making more and more use of data collected for commercial or private purposes; whereas private companies in various sectors are obliged to retain and provide personal data from their customer databases; whereas the costs connected with the storage and retrieval of data (both infrastructure investments and operational costs) are considerable, and in most cases borne by the private companies themselves, and invisible in national budgets;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G b (new) G b. whereas many sectors benefit from counter-terrorism measures, such as manufacturers of technical equipment or consultants for the implementation of counter-terrorism policies; whereas some companies and sectors benefit from public funding for security research; whereas counter-terrorism measures may add to the administrative burden for companies, contrary to the aim of cutting unnecessary red tape,
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) G a. Whereas the Stockholm Programme identifies two threats to internal security – international terrorism and organised crime – which, in many cases, operate in the same areas of activity, such as arms and drugs trafficking for example,
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) G a. whereas there is an urgent need for a uniform legal definition of the concept of ‘profiling’ based on the relevant fundamental rights and data protection standards to reduce uncertainty as to which activities are prohibited and which are not,
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G b (new) G b. whereas terrorist activities in Europe are mostly of a regional nature and there are considerable differences in their origins and modalities; whereas EU policies to coordinate national counterterrorism activities need to be tailored as opposed to having a ‘one size fits all approach’;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Strongly welcomes the Commission Communication;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital -A b (new) -A b. whereas any negotiation with terrorists that does not have as its sole aim the unconditional and final abandonment of weapons ends up reinforcing terrorists logistically, tactically and operationally, and denigrates the dignity of their victims and families,
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Strongly welcomes the Commission Communication;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Strongly welcomes the Commission Communication;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to prevent the rise of extremisms by taking specific measures based on integration of marginalised groups at local level, on inter-religious dialogue and on the promotion of civil responsibility by the religious organisations, both inside and outside the EU;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Deplores
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Deplores also the fact that the Communication does not sufficiently cover measures taken by DGs other than JLS (such as TRAN, ENTER or MARKT) and that it does not give a clear idea how the measures interact and where there is overlap or gaps; is of the opinion that all the above levels must also be considered, as European, national and international measures are complementary and assessing individual measures does not provide a
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Considers that counter-terrorism policies should aim first of all at protecting and saving lives,
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Believes that the Charter of Fundamental Rights should always be the compass for EU policies in this field and for Member States in the implementation thereof as well as in cooperation with third parties and third countries;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Considers that counter-terrorism policies
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Considers that counter-terrorism policies should
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital -A c (new) -A c. whereas international cooperation is essential to deprive terrorism of its financial, logistical and operational bases,
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Considers that counter-terrorism policies should meet the standards set with regard to civil liberties, the rule of law, proportionality and democratic scrutiny and accountability, and that assessing whether these standards are met must be an integral part of an evaluation of all EU counter-terrorism efforts;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Considers that counter-terrorism policies should meet the standards set with regard to necessity, effectiveness, proportionality, civil liberties, the rule of law and democratic scrutiny and accountability, and that assessing whether these standards are met must be an integral part of an evaluation;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Points out the importance of cooperation of Member States with OLAF as well as with European agencies such as Europol, Eurojust and CEPOL;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Recommends that the Commission focuses from now on in the Prevention axis of the Counter-terrorism Strategy as well as related and subsidiary policy documents in the field of Counter- terrorism;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Recalls that inside the EU, the terrorist threat is multidimensional, for decades heavily stemming from separatist sentiments and organised separatist movements; also, stresses that the EU must strike the adequate balance between the two main sources of terrorist violence, separatist terrorism and religiously- motivated terrorism, based on threat assessment exercises and qualitative information and information sharing at the EU level;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3 c. Recalls that radicalisation and recruitment pose the most significant and continuous long-term threat, as stressed in the Commission's Communication and constitute thus the axis on which the EU must focus its prevention strategies to counter terrorism at the very beginning of the chain; stresses that investment in anti- racism and anti-discrimination policies constitutes a crucial instrument to tackle and prevent radicalisation and recruitment of potential terrorists;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 d (new) 3 d. Calls on the Member States to act in a cooperative way with the EU authorities in tackling the radicalisation and recruitment phenomenon in Europe and calls on them to step up efforts in intelligence sharing; stresses that information sharing is in this regard vital for effective European-level policy- making to combat radicalisation of individuals;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 e (new) 3 e. Stresses the need for Member States to act in a collaborative way with each other and with the EU SitCen to reinforce intelligence sharing regarding possible CBRN terrorist threats; urges the Commission to ensure the proper implementation of the 2009 EU CBRN Action Plan by all Member States and further urges the Council to accept the recommendations made by the European Parliament to amend it according to its "Strengthening Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Security in the European Union - An Action Plan" report, adopted in December 2010;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Considers that prevention, tracking and prosecution of terrorist activities are critical policies at EU level and have to be part of a systematic approach, based not on emergency norms but on a coherent, necessity founded strategy, purpose and cost effective and avoiding duplication of measures and function creep of competent institutions, agencies and bodies;
source: PE-464.701
2011/05/05
AFET
44 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that international terrorism, as stated in the European Security Strategy1 and its Implementation Report2 , remains a
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Promotes a holistic approach to counter- terrorism policy by suggesting the harmonisation of the European Security Strategy and the Internal Security Strategy3 , and the strengthening of existing coordination mechanisms between Justice and Home Affairs Council structures, agencies and the European External Action Service
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Promotes a holistic and comprehensive approach to counter-
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 – point a (new) (a) Deeply regrets that in the EU counter terrorism policy the roots of terrorism, such as poverty are not tackled
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasises that the European Union's external actions to combat international terrorism should in the first place be aimed at prevention, and highlights the need to promote dialogue, tolerance and understanding among different cultures, civilisations and religions;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Urges EU Member States to ensure that no acts of terrorism originate from within their own borders and therefore commit sufficient resources to domestic counter-radicalization and counter- terrorism;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the Commission to further coordinate its efforts with NATO Alliance, which is at the front edge in assessing the security impact and of developing and operating response capabilities;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Highlights that there are institutional obstacles to an effective EU counter terrorism policy notably multiple committees, agencies and bureaucracies involved; emphasises that the Counter Terrorism Coordinator has a vital role to play in rationalising the system; suggests that he/she should be mandated with such a task and suggests that his/her work should be subject to parliamentary scrutiny.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises the strategic cooperation between the Union and the US reflected by various agreements;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that terrorism, as stated in the European Security Strategy
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises the strategic cooperation between the EU
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises the strategic cooperation between the European Union and the U
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises the strategic cooperation between the Union and the US reflected by various agreements; stresses therefore that the EU-US Agreement on the Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme (so-called SWIFT agreement), the Toledo declaration on aviation security and the Counter-Terrorism Declaration are positive examples to be followed in the Union's relations with other third countries;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses that good intelligence is crucial to combat terrorism and that the EU is uniquely well placed to facilitate intelligence sharing between member states; welcomes the work of SitCen in providing strategic analysis and encourages further intelligence sharing at the EU level between member states and key third countries
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Calls for closer cooperation between the EU and NATO in counter-terrorism policy and suggests that the HR/VP and Counter Terrorism Coordinator should be actively engaged in counter-terrorism discussions with NATO.
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 c (new) Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Underlines that counter-terrorism is
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that terrorism, as stated in the European Security Strategy1 and its Implementation Report2, remains a major threat to international stability and European societies that requires a global
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Underlines that counter-terrorism
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Underlines that counter-terrorism is an integral part of the Union's relations with third countries; asks for an increase in the funding of counter-terrorism assistance measures in the next Instrument for Stability in order to prevent state failure; agrees, in this respect, with the priority areas being South Asia, in particular Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Sahel region (Mauretania, Mali, Niger), Somalia and Yemen;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Demands that the EU and EU Member States fully clarify, in line with the recommendations of the European Parliament and the Council of Europe, their role in the US programme of rendition, Guantanamo, secret detention and torture, and make clear whether judicial or other inquiries into such issues have been cancelled at the request of third countries; underlines that the EU must help the US in finding appropriate solutions for the closing of Guantanamo and ensuring that the detainees get fair civilian trials;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Points out the common values that the Union shares with other international organisations, especially the UN; stresses the need for the universal ratification and implementation of the UN conventions and protocols against terrorism; advocates the adoption of a UN Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Points out the common values that the Union shares with other international organisations, especially the UN; stresses the need for
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Points out the common values that the Union shares with other international organisations, especially the UN; stresses the need for the universal ratification and implementation of the UN conventions and protocols against terrorism; advocates the adoption of a UN Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism; highlights the EU's achievement of promoting a Global Counter Terrorism Strategy at the UN level and asks for greater flexibility in the UN Security Council process of listing terrorist organisations and individuals;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Points out the common values and objectives that the Union shares with other international organisations, especially the UN; stresses the need for the universal ratification and implementation of the UN conventions and protocols against terrorism; advocates the adoption of a UN Comprehensive Convention on Terrorism; asks for
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls for the creation of a comprehensive strategy on the growing interconnection between international organised crime and terrorism; encourages the continuous analysis of new trends and traits in diversification, radicalisation and recruitment and those related to the role of international non-governmental organisations in terrorism financing; calls for this analysis to take full advantage of the expertise of external experts and researchers and make effective use of the various funding mechanisms.
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that terrorism, as stated in the European Security Strategy1 and its Implementation Report2 , remains a major threat to international stability and European societies that requires a globally coordinated response; welcomes, in the area of CSDP, the ongoing update of the military database and the European Defence Agency's contribution to combating terrorism;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls for the creation of a comprehensive strategy on the growing interconnection between international organised crime, drug trafficking and terrorism; encourages the continuous analysis of new trends and traits in diversification, radicalisation and recruitment and those related to the role of
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Calls for the creation of a comprehensive strategy on the
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Stresses the EU commitment to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the beneficial impact of this policy also for counter terrorism; urges the member states to ensure the highest standards of responsibility in export control policies and calls for strict implementation of the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports and the dual use items export control regime;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Notes that it is important and necessary for the situation in the fight against terrorism to be re-evaluated and reassessed following the death of Osama bin Laden;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6 b. Draws attention to the need to expand and develop strategic partnerships with countries such as Japan, Russia, China and India;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recognises that terrorism, as stated in the European Security Strategy1 and its Implementation Report2, remains a
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Considers that EU external relations related to counter-terrorism in the context of CFSP and CSDP must meet high standards with regard to the rule of law, civil liberties and human rights, democratic scrutiny and accountability; stresses that a comprehensive evaluation of the EU counter-terrorism policies by a panel of independent experts would enable the strategy to be evidence-based, coherent and comprehensive;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Emphasises the need for the European Union, its Member States and its partner countries to base their strategy for combating international terrorism on the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Promotes
source: PE-464.734
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/0 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/6/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=20453&j=0&l=en
|
docs/7 |
|
events/5/docs |
|
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE460.953New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-PR-460953_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE460.613&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AD-460613_EN.html |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE464.701New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AM-464701_EN.html |
docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE462.602&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/AFET-AD-462602_EN.html |
docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0286_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0286_EN.html |
events/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/3/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/4 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/5/docs |
|
events/7 |
|
events/7 |
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
|
docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2011-286&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0286_EN.html |
docs/6/body |
EC
|
events/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2011-286&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2011-0286_EN.html |
events/6/date |
Old
2011-12-14T00:00:00New
2011-09-13T00:00:00 |
events/7/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2011-577New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2011-0577_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
|
council |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
LIBE/7/04829New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
procedure/title |
Old
EU Counter-Terrorism Policy: main achievements and future challengesNew
EU counter-terrorism policy: main achievements and future challenges |
activities/0/commission/0/DG/title |
Old
Home AffairsNew
Migration and Home Affairs |
activities/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2010/0386/COM_COM(2010)0386_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2010/0386/COM_COM(2010)0386_EN.pdf |
other/0/dg/title |
Old
Home AffairsNew
Migration and Home Affairs |
activities/1/committees/3/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fc92ed1d1c51621000000New
4f1ac8a0b819f25efd0000e4 |
activities/1/committees/4/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fc318d1d1c57f99000000New
4f1ac934b819f25efd00011a |
activities/3/committees/3/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fc92ed1d1c51621000000New
4f1ac8a0b819f25efd0000e4 |
activities/3/committees/4/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fc318d1d1c57f99000000New
4f1ac934b819f25efd00011a |
committees/3/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fc92ed1d1c51621000000New
4f1ac8a0b819f25efd0000e4 |
committees/4/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fc318d1d1c57f99000000New
4f1ac934b819f25efd00011a |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|