Procedure completed
Next event: Amendments tabled in committee 2013/05/29 more...
- Amendments tabled in committee 2013/06/11
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading 2013/06/25
- Text adopted by Parliament, single reading 2013/07/03
- Debate in Parliament 2013/07/02
- Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading 2013/06/19
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Opinion | AFCO | ||
Lead | LIBE | TAVARES Rui (Verts/ALE) | ENGEL Frank (EPP), LÓPEZ AGUILAR Juan Fernando (S&D), WEBER Renate (ALDE), MCINTYRE Anthea (ECR), VERGIAT Marie-Christine (GUE/NGL) |
Legal Basis RoP 048
Activites
- 2013/07/03 Text adopted by Parliament, single reading
- 2013/07/02 Debate in Parliament
-
2013/06/25
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
-
A7-0229/2013
summary
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted the report by Rui TAVARES (Greens/EFA, PT) on the situation of fundamental rights: standards and practices in Hungary (pursuant to the European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2012 on the recent political developments in Hungary). The report was prepared to assess whether and how the recommendations set out in that resolution have been implemented and to present the committee’s findings. The report reaffirms that this resolution is not only about Hungary, but inseparably about the European Union as a whole, and its democratic reconstruction and development after the fall of the 20th century totalitarianisms. It is about the mutual help and mutual trust that the Union, its citizens and its Member States need to have if these Treaties are to be not just words on paper, but the legal basis for a true, just and open Europe respecting fundamental rights. It also reaffirms that the credibility and robustness of constitutional institutions play a pivotal role in underpinning economic, fiscal and social policies and social cohesion. Appeal to all Member States: the report calls on the Member States to comply without delay with their Treaty obligations to respect, guarantee, protect and promote the Union’s common values, which is an indispensable condition for respecting democracy. Appeal to the European Council: the committee notes with disappointment that the European Council is the only EU political institution that has remained silent, while the Commission, Parliament, the Council of Europe, the OSCE and even the US Administration have voiced concerns over the situation in Hungary. It reminds the European Council of its responsibilities within the framework of the area of freedom, liberty, security and justice. Recommendation to the Commission: Members call on the Commission, as the guardian of the Treaties to ensure that Union law is correctly applied, under the supervision of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Recommendations to the Hungarian authorities: the report urges the Hungarian authorities to implement as swiftly as possible all the measures the European Commission deems necessary in order to fully comply with EU law, fully comply with the decisions of the Hungarian Constitutional Court and implement as swiftly as possible Parliament’s recommendations, in line with the recommendations of various international bodies for the protection of the rule of law and fundamental rights, with a view to fully complying with the rule of law and its key requirements on the constitutional setting, the system of checks and balances and the independence of the judiciary, as well as on strong safeguards for fundamental rights, including freedom of expression, the media and religion or belief, protection of minorities, action to combat discrimination, and the right to property. Recommendations to the EU institutions on setting up a new mechanism to enforce Article 2 TEU effectively: lastly, Members reiterate the urgent need to tackle the so-called ‘Copenhagen dilemma’, whereby the EU remains very strict with regard to compliance with the common values and standards on the part of candidate countries but lacks effective monitoring and sanctioning tools once they have joined the EU.
-
A7-0229/2013
summary
-
2013/06/19
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2013/06/11
Amendments tabled in committee
- PE513.275
- 2013/05/29 Amendments tabled in committee
- 2013/05/02 Committee draft report
-
2012/07/05
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
- Committee draft report: PE508.211
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE510.840
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE510.846
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE513.275
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0229/2013
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T7-0315/2013
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
Amendments | Dossier |
272 |
2012/2130(INI)
2013/05/22
LIBE
272 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 c (new) - Having regard to the fact that on several points the rapporteur obviously goes beyond the competence of the European Parliament,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 17 – having regard to the Fourth Amendment of the Fundamental Law, tabled on 8 February 2013 in the form of an individual member's bill and adopted by the Hungarian Parliament on 11 March 2013, which, among other provisions, integrates into the text of the Fundamental Law the
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AF a (new) AFa. whereas the Act XXXVI of 2012 on the National Assembly has vested the Speaker of the Parliament with an extensive discretionary power to limit MPs' free expression in the Parliament;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AF b (new) AFb. whereas, under the Fundamental Law, the possibility for two new kinds of constitutional complaint to the Constitutional Court has been introduced, while the actio popularis for ex post review has been abolished;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Heading I - Subheading 6 Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AG Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AG AG. whereas, under the Fundamental Law, the powers of the Constitutional Court
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AG AG. whereas
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AG a (new) AGa. whereas, under the Fundamental Law, the powers of the Constitutional Court to review budget-related laws are temporary in nature and limited in scope; and whereas the constitutional rules on the powers of the Constitutional Court regarding budget-related laws do not affect the right of the Constitutional Court regarding the unlimited ex ante review of all budget-related legislative acts, regarding the unlimited ex post review of all legal acts other than acts of Parliament (e.g. government decrees), regarding the full ex ante and ex post review of all budget-related legislative acts from a procedural point of view and regarding full ex ante and ex post review of all budget-related legislative acts with regard to their compliance with international treaty obligations;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AG b (new) AGb. whereas the Constitutional Court may ensure an effective fundamental rights protection even under the scope of restriction;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AH AH. whereas the Fourth Amendment of the Fundamental Law
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AI AI. whereas the Constitutional Court, in its
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 17 a (new) - having regard to the Part V of the reasoning of the Constitutional Court's Decision No 45/2012, which among other states, that "following the decision of the Constitutional Court, it is the task and the responsibility of the constituent power to clear up the situation after the partial annulment. The Parliament shall make an evident and clear legal situation. The Parliament shall revise the subject matters of the annulled non-transitional provisions and decide on which matters should be re-regulated and on which level of legal sources. That is also for the Parliament to decide on which provisions to be re-regulated should be incorporated into the Fundamental Law and which should be laid down on level of [ordinary or cardinal] Acts",
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AJ AJ. whereas the Fourth Amendment of the Fundamental Law further stipulates that the rulings of the Constitutional Court adopted before the entry into force of the Fundamental Law shall be repealed
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AJ AJ. whereas the Fourth Amendment of the Fundamental Law further stipulates that the rulings of the Constitutional Court adopted before the entry into force of the Fundamental Law shall be repealed, and
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AK AK. whereas
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AK AK. whereas a non-parliamentary body, the Budget Council, with limited democratic legitimacy, has been granted the power to veto the adoption of the general budget, thus restricting the scope for action of the democratically elected legislature and allowing the President of the Republic to dissolve the Parliament;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AK a (new) AKa. whereas the Budget Council may exercise a veto only as a last resort exceptional measure, when Parliament is to adopt a budget leading to the growth of state indebtedness; and whereas otherwise the ordinary function of the Council is to undertake a preliminary review of the draft national budget and to make recommendations;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AL AL. whereas the new Freedom of Information Act, adopted in July 2011, reformed the data protection institution by estab
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AL AL. whereas the new Freedom of Information Act, adopted in July 2011,
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AM AM. whereas the Commission initiated an infringement procedure against Hungary on 8 June 2012, declaring that Hungary had failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 95/46/EC by removing the data protection supervisor from office before the end of the mandate
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AN Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AN AN. whereas, according to the Fundamental Law and its transitional provisions, the six-year-long mandate of the former President of the Supreme Court
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 28 – having regard to the letter of 8 March 2013 sent by the Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr János Martonyi, to all his counterparts in the Member States of the EU explaining the purpose of the Fourth Amendment,
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AP AP. whereas key safeguards for judicial independence, such as irremovability, guaranteed term of office, the structure and composition of the governing bodies, are not regulated in the
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AP AP. whereas key safeguards for judicial independence, such as irremovability, guaranteed term of office, the structure and composition of the governing bodies, are not regulated in the Constitution but are – together with detailed rules on the organization and administration of the judiciary – still set out in the amended cardinal laws
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AQ Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AQ Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AQ AQ. whereas the
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AQ AQ. whereas the independence of the Constitutional Court is not set forth in the Fundamental Law of Hungary and neither is the independence of the
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AQ a (new) AQa. whereas the respective Act on the judiciary states - and it also follows from the Fundamental Law - that due to the principle of lawful judge, no one can be deprived from his/her legal judge, thus the purpose of the rule on case-transfer is to guarantee the fundamental right to a decision within a reasonable time and to distribute the case-loads of courts evenly; and whereas the procedure of allocation of a case has to be initiated by the court in charge with sound justification and never initiated by the President of the National Judicial Office;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AR AR. whereas
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AR AR. whereas the amendment of the cardinal laws on the judiciary as regards the power of the President of the National Judicial Office to transfer cases from the presiding court to another court to ensure the adjudication of cases within a reasonable period of time
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AT AT. whereas the Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union, adopted on 6 November 2012, states that the radical lowering of the retirement age for Hungarian judges as well as prosecutors and notaries from 70 to 62 years of age constitutes unjustified discrimination on grounds of age, and whereas two complaints were submitted by two groups of Hungarian judges to the ECtHR on 20 June 2012 seeking a ruling to establish that Hungary's legislation on lowering the retirement age for judges violates the ECHR;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 30 – having regard to the joint statement of 11 March 2013 by President Barroso and Secretary General Jagland recalling their concerns regarding the Fourth Amendment of the Fundamental Law with respect to the principle of the rule of law; and having regard to the confirmation made by Prime Minister Orbán, in his letter addressed to President Barroso on 8 March 2013, of the full commitment of the Hungarian Government and Parliament to the European norms and values,
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AU AU. whereas on 11 March 2013 the Hungarian Parliament adopted Act No XX of 2013 amending the upper age limits with a view to complying with the rulings of the Hungarian Constitutional Court of 16 July 2012 and of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 November 2012; whereas, the Hungarian Government regularly informed the Commission on the developments; whereas in its letter to Vice-President Reding from 17 May 2013 Deputy Prime Minister Tibor Navracsics submitted all the data proving the execution of the CJEU judgement;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AU AU. whereas on 11 March 2013 the Hungarian Parliament adopted Act No XX of 2013 amending the upper age limits with a view to partly complying with the rulings of the Hungarian Constitutional Court of 16 July 2012 and of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 November 2012;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AU a (new) AUa. whereas the governing majority in Parliament reformed the election system in a unilateral manner without striving for consensus with the opposition,
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AU b (new) AUb. whereas the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR prepared a joint opinion on the Act on the Election of Members of Parliament of Hungary on 15 and 16 June 2012,
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AV AV. whereas as part of the recent electoral reform the Hungarian Parliament passed, on 26 November 2012, on the basis of an
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AV a (new) AVa. Whereas the recent survey of Zero Project 2013 in cooperation with 374 persons with disabilities, experts and academics as well as NGOs, foundations and international organizations in 116 countries and the World Future Council states that in Hungary any voter with disabilities receives all necessary support to vote in secret.
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AV b (new) AVb. Whereas the recent survey of Zero Project 2013 in cooperation with 374 persons with disabilities, experts and academics as well as NGOs, foundations and international organizations in 116 countries and the World Future Council states that in Hungary any voter with disabilities receives all necessary support to vote in secret in contrast to the practice of other EU Member States;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AV c (new) AVc. Whereas one of the principles of the Act XXXVI of 2013 on the election procedure in Hungary (Article 2) expressly prescribes that the need of people with disabilities, including people with metal health disabilities, shall be taken into account in accordance with the support of the chosen person by the disabled or two persons from the local electoral committee to help the disabled person to vote if he/she personally requests (Article 181);
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AV d (new) AVd. Whereas one of the principles of the Act XXXVI of 2013 on the election procedure in Hungary (Article 2) expressly prescribes that the need of people with disabilities, including people with metal health disabilities, shall be taken into account in accordance with the support of the chosen person by the disabled or two persons from the local electoral committee to help the disabled person to vote if he/she personally requests (Article 181);
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AW AW. whereas the Second Amendment of the Fundamental Law enshrining the requirement of voter registration was tabled as an individual member's bill in full accordance with the procedural requirements of legislative initiative on the same day as the draft law on the election procedure, namely on 18 September 2012, and was adopted on 29 October 2012,
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 35 – having regard to the statements by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) of 15 February 2012 and of 11 December 2012 calling on Hungary, respectively, to reconsider legislation
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AX AX. whereas
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AY Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AY AY. whereas
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BD BD. whereas Member States have a duty to constantly promote and protect freedom of
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BF BF. whereas criticism of
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BJ BJ. whereas the Commission has raised concerns regarding the conformity of the Hungarian media law with the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and the acquis communautaire in general, notably in relation to the obligation to offer balanced coverage applicable to all audiovisual media service providers, and has also questioned whether that law complies with the principle of proportionality and respects the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter, the country of origin principle and registration requirements, and whereas, in March 2011, following negotiations with the Commission, the Hungarian Parliament amended the
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BK BK. whereas the OSCE has expressed serious, in certain issues factually mistaken, reservations regarding the material and territorial scope of Hungarian legislation, the politically homogeneous composition of the Media Authority and Media Council, the disproportionate penalties imposed, the lack of an automatic procedure for suspending penalties in the event of an appeal to the courts against a Media Authority ruling, the violation of the principle of the confidentiality of
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BL a (new) BLa. whereas, despite the fact that the laws were amended in 2011 following negotiations with the European Commission and in May 2012 further to the decision of the Constitutional Court of December 2011, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media has deplored that several amendments were introduced and adopted at short notice without consulting stakeholders and that fundamental elements in the legislation have not been improved, notably the appointment of the president and members of the Media Authority and Media Council, their power over content in the broadcast media, the imposition of high fines and the lack of safeguards on the financial and editorial independence of public broadcasters;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BN BN. whereas an analysis by Council of Europe experts
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BO Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 35 – having regard to the statements by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) of 15 February 2012 and of 11 December 2012 calling on Hungary, respectively, to reconsider legislation
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BO Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BO BO. whereas, despite the fact that the laws were amended in 2011 following negotiations with the European Commission and in May 2012 further to the decision of the Constitutional Court of December 2011 overturning several provisions as unconstitutional regarding the content regulation of the printed press, the protection of the sources of journalists, the requirement of data provision, and the institution of the Media and Telecommunications Commissioner, the OSCE Representative on freedom of the Media has deplored that several amendments were introduced and adopted at short notice without consulting stakeholders and that fundamental elements in the legislation have not been improved, notably the appointment of the president and members of the Media Authority and Media Council, their power over content in the broadcast media, the imposition of high fines and the lack of safeguards on the financial and editorial independence of public broadcasters;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BP BP. whereas,
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BQ BQ. whereas the Hungarian Authorities are in the process of reviewing the Fourth Amendment that imposes press restrictions as it bans all political advertising during electoral campaigns except for advertising in the public media;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BQ BQ. whereas the Fourth Amendment imposes press restrictions as it bans all political advertising during electoral campaigns except for advertising in the public media; and also imposes a broad and potentially vague prohibition on speech aimed at violating the dignity of groups, including the Hungarian nation, that may be used to arbitrarily interfere with freedom of expression and may have a chilling effect on journalists, and also on artists and others;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BQ BQ. whereas the Fourth Amendment
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BQ BQ. whereas the Fourth Amendment
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BR Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BS BS. whereas the respect for the rights of persons belonging to minorities is explicitly recognised among the values referred to in Article 2 TEU and the Union is committed to promoting these values and combating social exclusion, racism, anti- Semitism and discrimination;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BS a (new) BSa. whereas the right not to suffer discrimination is a fundamental right enshrined in Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 37 – having regard to the ongoing infringement proceedings in Case C- 288/12 brought by the European Commission against Hungary over the
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BS a (new) BSa. whereas the Hungarian government adopted the Act CCIII of 2011 (currently Act XXXVI of 2013) on the elections of the Members of Parliament of Hungary, which allows minority representatives for the first time to gain a seat in the Parliament, thus finally assures the political representation of minorities, requested over almost for two decades; and whereas the adopted Act CLXXIX of 2011 on the Rights of Minorities recognises and guarantees rights to its thirteen recognised nationalities and their members in the main areas of interest for the protection of their identity - education, culture, private and public use of the mother tongue, access to media and participation - and aims to improve and strengthen the available institutional arrangements for nationality self- government in these areas; and whereas in its Opinion CDL-AD(2012)011 the Venice Commission confirms that "Hungary has continued to pay particular attention to the promotion and protection of minority rights and to make specific efforts to ensure protection and preservation of the ethnic, cultural and linguistic identity, traditions and cultural heritage of its nationalities";
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BT BT. whereas the responsibility of Member States to ensure that the fundamental rights of all are respected, irrespective of their ethnicity or belief, covers all levels of public administration as well as the law enforcement authorities and also implies actively promoting tolerance and firmly condemning phenomena such as racial violence
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BT a (new) BTa. whereas the Fourth Amendment of the Hungarian Fundamental Law states that the right to freedom of speech may not be exercised with the aim of violating the human dignity of other people introducing the sanctioning of hate- speech in the highest level of legislation, welcomed by several minority organisations, and whereas this type of regulation exists in a very few other Member States;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BU Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BU BU. whereas the lack and inadequacy of reaction by the law enforcement authorities during the previous government in cases of racially motivated crime12 - most notably in the case of the 2008-2009 'Roma killings', the most serious series of crime in Hungarian criminal history -, as well as in the case of violence against peaceful commemorators and innocent civilians by police forces in the autumn of 2006 acting on the orders of the government, infringing the most fundamental rights, human dignity and all acknowledged European values, has resulted in mistrust of the police forces;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BW Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BW BW. whereas, although intolerance against the members of Roma and Jewish communities is not a problem solely associated with Hungary and other Member States are faced with the same predicament, recent events have raised concerns as to the increase in anti-Roma
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BW BW. whereas, although intolerance against the members of Roma and Jewish communities is not a problem solely associated with Hungary and other Member States are faced with the same predicament, recent events have raised concerns as to the increase in anti-Roma and anti-Semitic
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BW a (new) BWa. whereas the imposition of retroactive tax and pensions legislation has increased social vulnerability and poverty on a massive scale, a fact which is not only causing great uncertainty among the people, but also constitutes a violation of private ownership rights and is undermining fundamental civil liberties;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Heading I - Subheading 11 Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 37 – having regard to the ongoing infringement proceedings in Case C- 288/12 brought by the European Commission against Hungary over the
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BX Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BX BX. whereas freedom of thought, conscience and religion as enshrined in Article 9 of the ECHR and Article 10 of the Charter
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BY Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BY BY. whereas the
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BZ Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BZ BZ. whereas the
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Recital BZ – footnote 13 Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CA Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CA CA. whereas
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CB Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 38 – having regard to the Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 November 2012 on the radical lowering of the retirement age for Hungarian judges, and having regard to the subsequent adoption of the Act No XX of 2013 amending the Act CLXII of 2011 - adopted by the Hungarian Parliament on 11 March 2013 - to comply with the decision of the European Court of Justice,
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CB CB. whereas
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CC Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CC Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CC Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CC CC. whereas the Constitutional Court in
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CD Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CD Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CD Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CD a (new) - Whereas the elements of the constitutional system of the Member States fall into the competencies of the European Commission, the European Parliament and which parts belong solely to the competences of the Member States according to the Lisbon Treaty are not defined,
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CD b (new) - Whereas the norms of democracy and the rule of law equally valid to each Member State are not defined precisely and consistently,
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 40 Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Recital CD c (new) - Whereas this resolution refers to a single Member State without examining how the norms asserted herein are implemented in other Member States and without comparing them with each other,
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 12 a (new) I suggest that the entire report should be dismissed and removed from the agenda.
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that respect for legality, including a transparent, accountable and democratic process of enacting laws and adopting a Fundamental Law, and for a strong system of representative democracy based on free elections and respecting the rights of the opposition are key elements of the concepts of democracy and the rule of law as enshrined in Article 2 TEU and proclaimed in the Preambles to both the Treaty on the European Union and the Charter;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Firmly reiterates that, while the drafting and the adoption of a new constitution falls within the scope of Member States’ competences, Member States and the EU have the responsibility to ensure that the constitutional processes and the contents of constitutions are in conformity with the commitments entered into by every Member State under the EU Accession Treaties, that is to say, the common values of the Union, the Charter and the ECHR;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Regrets that, from the point of view of protecting European core values, the EU institutions have not always managed in the past to live up to their own standards; maintains, therefore, that it falls to them in particular to take a stand in order to safeguard European fundamental rights as referred to in Article 2 TEU, both at Union level and in Member States;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 f (new) - Having regard to the fact that the report does not take into consideration the position and findings of the Hungarian Government,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 40 Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Welcomes that the Fundamental Law of Hungary reiterates as well as reaffirms the articles of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Hungary, as the fourth country in the EU, recognizes the Hungarian sign language (HSL) as a fully fledged language and it defends the HSL as part of Hungarian culture in Article H.
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Welcomes that the Fundamental Law of Hungary reiterates as well as reaffirms the articles of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Hungary, as the fourth country in the EU, recognizes the Hungarian sign language (HSL) as a fully fledged language and it defends the HSL as part of Hungarian culture in Article H.
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Takes note of the above-mentioned Decision of 28 December 2012 of the Constitutional Court declaring that
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Takes note of the above-mentioned Decision of 28 December 2012 of the
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Welcomes that the Fundamental Law of Hungary particularly prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, gender, disability, language, religion, political or other views, national or social origin, financial, birth or other circumstances whatsoever in Article XV as well as that Hungary shall adopt special measures to protect children, women, the elderly and persons living with disabilities in accordance with the Articles 20-26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Welcomes that Hungary adopted special measures to protect children, women, the elderly and persons living with disabilities in accordance with Articles 20-26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 41 Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls that in its above-mentioned Decision of 28 December 2012, the Constitutional Court gave a clear ruling on
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Recalls that the common values of the Union of democracy and the rule of law require a strong system of representative
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Welcomes that the Act XXXVI of 2013 on the election procedure in Hungary, Article 42 in particular, prescribes that, upon request, people with disabilities shall be provided with admonitions in Braille, relevant information in easy-to-read form, voting sample in Braille at polls as well as full accessibility of polls, including paying particular attention to the needs of the wheelchair users. In addition, based on Article 50 of the before mentioned act, disabled voters can ask to be registered at another, more accessible polls to cast their votes in the given constituency in accordance with the obligation of the creation of at least one fully accessible poll in every constituency in Article 81;
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Welcomes that the Act XXXVI of 2013 on the election procedure in Hungary, Article 42 in particular, prescribes that, upon request, people with disabilities shall be provided with admonitions in Braille, relevant information in easy-to-read form, voting sample in Braille at polls as well as full accessibility of polls, including paying particular attention to the needs of the wheelchair users. In addition, based on Article 50 of the before mentioned act, disabled voters can ask to be registered at another, more accessible polls to cast their votes in the given constituency in accordance with the obligation of the creation of at least one fully accessible poll in every constituency in Article 81;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Considers that the
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 41 Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that use of the individual members' bills procedure to implement the constitution (through cardinal laws) does not constitute a transparent, accountable and democratic legislative process as i
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that use of the individual members' bills procedure
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Shares the opinion of the Venice Commission (No CDL-AD(2012)001), according to which the adoption of a large amount of legislation in a very short time frame could explain why some of the new provisions do not comply with European standards, although it reminds that the Commission admitted that there was a need to improve the efficiency of the previous system;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Welcomes the fact that when the members of the two institutions met in Eger on 16 May 2013, the Presidents of the Hungarian and Romanian constitutional courts, Péter Paczolay and Augustin Zegrean, issued a joint statement stressing that constitutional courts bear a special responsibility in countries ruled by a two-thirds majority;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Recalls that the constitutional majority raised the number of constitutional judges from 11 to 15 and abolished the requirement of reaching an agreement with the opposition regarding the election of constitutional judges. Is concerned that due to these measures 8 out of the 15 current constitutional judges have been elected by the 2/3 majority exclusively (with one exception), including two new members who were appointed directly from their position of Member of Parliament.
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Considers that
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Takes note that in several Member States the competences of the constitutional court is limited or restricted to a certain type of procedures, furthermore, there is no legal regulation for the competences of the constitutional court regarding the supervision of the constitution or any amendments thereof among others in Austria, Lithuania, Slovenia, France or Portugal; and takes note that in several Member States does not even exist the institute of a separate constitutional court at all (e.g. among others in Finland or in Greece, or the Danish system of courts, which are based on a unified structure, or in Ireland, where Supreme Court can deal with constitutional issues);
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Recalls that as declared by the Constitutional Court in its Decision No 45/2012, 'Constitutional legality has not only procedural, formal and public law validity requirements, but also substantial ones [...]. As appropriate, the Constitutional Court may even examine the free enforcement and the constitutionalisation of the substantial
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Considers that
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas the European Union is founded on the values of
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Considers that after the entry into force of the Fourth Amendment the
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Considers that after the entry into force of the Fourth Amendment the Constitutional Court's ca
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Is
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15.
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15.
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16.
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU constitute the core of the rights
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that protection against removal from office during the term of office is an essential element of the requirement of the independence of national data protection authorities under EU law; Takes note that in the Hungarian case removal from office was due to the reform of the data protection institution, by establishing the National Authority for Data Protection instead of the Commissioner on Data Protection and Freedom of Information, and by transferring its powers to the newly-established Authority, with a new status which attaches legal consequences to its procedures;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21.
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the values set out in Article 2 TEU have to be addressed politically and legally, this being an indispensable foundation of our democratic society, and whereas, therefore, Member States, as well as all the EU institutions, must commit themselves to them, clearly and unambiguously;
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22.
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22.
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Expresses its disquiet at the infringements of the right to organise, as for instance in the case of teachers, who are admittedly allowed to form specialist trade unions, whereas the relevant powers-that-be are insisting that they will not negotiate with any professional association other than the ‘Hungarian Chamber of Teachers’:
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26.
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Considers that the premature termination of the term of office of the Supreme Court's President did not violate
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28.
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Regrets, however, that not all the recommendations of the Venice Commission have been implemented, in particular as regards the need to limit discretionary powers of the President of the National Judicial Office in the context of the transfer of cases, which potentially affect the right to a fair trial and the principle of a lawful judge, while taking note that the Hungarian government is still in the process of reviewing the matter;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30.
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas respecting and promoting such common values is not only an essential element of the European Union's identity but also an explicit obligation deriving from Article 3(1) and (5) TEU, and therefore a sine qua non for becoming an EU Member State as well as for fully preserving membership prerogatives, the essential element of which are unfortunately not taken fully into account by several Member States, when concrete breaches of these values are identified;
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Regrets, however, that not all the recommendations of the Venice Commission have been implemented, in particular as regards the need to limit discretionary powers of the President of the National Judicial Office in the context of the transfer of cases, which potentially affect the right to a fair trial and the
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30.
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Takes note of the statement of the Deputy Prime Minister Tibor Navracsics on 3 March 2013 on the visit of the President of the European Court of Human Rights, Dean Spielmann to the Hungarian Parliament, that the transfer of cases is only a short term solution and is needed in order to reduce the workload and fasten the decision-making process of the courts of the capital region, thus improving the efficiency of the judicial system as a whole; furthermore takes note of the fact underlined by Dean Spielmann that 75% of the Hungarian cases at the European Court of Human Rights are in connection with the delay of the court decisions;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas the obligations incumbent on candidate countries under the Copenhagen criteria continue to apply to the Member States after joining the EU by virtue of Article 2 TEU and the principle of sincere co-operation, and whereas all Member States should therefore be assessed on a regular basis in order to verify their continued compliance with the EU's common values;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 g (new) - Having regard to the fact that the report provides untrue statements about the Hungarian situation,
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas Article 4(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) stipulates that competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D b (new) Db. whereas Article 5(2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), by virtue of the principle of conferral, allows the Union to act only within the limits of the competences conferred upon it by the Member States in the Treaties to attain the objectives set out therein;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas Article 6(3) TEU underscores that fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the ECHR and as arising from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, constitute general principles of Union law, and whereas such rights are a common heritage and
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas, with the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon and pursuant to Article 6 TEU, the Charter
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas Article 7(1) TEU, by an exactly defined procedure, grants the EU institutions the power to assess whether there is a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values referred to in Article 2 by a Member State, and to engage politically with the country concerned in order to prevent and redress violations, while the ultimate purpose of the means laid down in Article 7(2) and (3) TEU is to penalise and remedy any serious and persistent breach of common values;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas Article 7(1) TEU grants the EU institutions the power to assess whether there is a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values referred to in Article 2 by a Member State, and to engage politically with the country concerned in order to prevent and redress violations,
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas according to Article 7(1) TEU
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H H. whereas the
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J J. whereas respect for the Union's common values goes hand in hand with the EU's commitment to diversity, translated into the obligation for the Union to respect ‘the equality of Member States before the Treaties as well as their national identities
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J J. whereas respect for the Union’s common values goes hand in hand with the EU’s commitment to diversity, translated into the obligation for the Union to respect ‘the equality of Member States before the Treaties as well as their national identities’ as stated in Article 4(2) TEU; whereas, therefore, the values set out in Article 2 TEU cannot be played off against the obligation under Article 4 TEU to respect national identity; whereas, on the contrary, the European core values listed in Article 2 TEU make up the basic framework within which Member States can preserve and develop their national identity;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 h (new) - Having regard to the fact that based on the aforementioned the report is one-sided and biased,
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Recital K Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Recital K K. whereas, in the framework of the Treaties, respect for ‘national identities’ (Article 4(2)TEU) and for ‘different legal systems and traditions of the Member
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Recital L Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Recital L L. whereas a
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Recital L Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Recital N N. whereas, therefore, not only the credibility of the Member States and of the EU on the international scene, but also the Union’s objectives in its external action, would be undermined if Member States were not able or willing to live up to the standards to which they have agreed and bound themselves by signing the Treaties;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Recital O O. whereas respect by the Member States for the same set of fundamental values is an indispensable condition for ensuring mutual trust and consequently the correct functioning of mutual recognition, which is at the heart of the
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas the Commission, under Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union, ‘ensure[s] the application of the Treaties ... [and] oversee[s] the application of Union law under the control of the Court of Justice of the European Union’;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 i (new) - Having regard to the fact that the report unduly violates the volume requirements for an own-initiative report provided by the European Parliament,
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Q a (new) Qa. whereas over the course of Hungary’s centuries-long history, the peaceful coexistence of nationalities and ethnic groups has enhanced the nation’s cultural richness and its prosperity; and whereas Hungary should be called upon to continue that tradition and take resolute steps to curb any attempts to discriminate against individual groups;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Recital R R. whereas Hungary is also a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other international legal instruments
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Recital R a (new) Ra. whereas in September 2006 following the leak of former Socialist Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány's speech in which he confessed that during the electoral campaign the Socialist government forged data to hide the real economic situation of the country and said that they "were lying during morning, night and evening to win the elections" the EU did not taken any steps for intervention and whereas the left-wing block of the EP also blocked to raise the issue within the EP;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Recital R b (new) Rb. whereas in September and October 2006 thousands of people were continuously protesting against the Socialist Government on the streets of Budapest which demonstrations were brutally repressed by the police; whereas masses of severe human rights violations took place against peaceful commemorators; innocent civilians and several journalists were beaten up, tortured and detained unlawfully by the police forces acting on the order of the government infringing the most fundamental rights and human dignity, and all acknowledged European values; and whereas in these cases the European Parliament remained silent;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Recital R c (new) Rc. whereas incontestable evidence has been revealed during the investigation in the 'Portik-Laborc' case proving that during the Socialist government before 2010 the intelligence was in close contact and collaboration with most known actors of organized crime in Hungary, also aiming at discredit the FIDESZ being back then in opposition and to hinder its success in the upcoming 2010 election;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Recital R d (new) Rd. whereas the 8 years of the disastrous economic governance of the Socialists and Liberals between 2002 and 2010 led to the raise of public debt of Hungary from 53 per cent to above 80 per cent of GDP and made Hungary the first EU country to ask for an IMF bailout in 2008 in the beginning of the economic crisis;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Recital R e (new) Re. whereas the 8 years of the disastrous economic governance of the Socialists and Liberals between 2002 and 2010 led to the raise of public debt of Hungary from 53 per cent to above 80 per cent of GDP and made Hungary the first EU country to ask for an IMF bailout in 2008 in the beginning of the economic crisis;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Recital S S. whereas following the 2010 general elections in Hungary the democratically elected governing majority gained more than two thirds of the seats in parliament
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Recital S S. whereas following the 2010 general elections in Hungary the governing
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Recital S S. whereas following the 2010 general elections in Hungary the governing majority gained more than two thirds of the seats in parliament, enabling it to rapidly initiate intense legislative activity to reshape the whole constitutional order of the country (the Constitution has been amended twelve times and the Fundamental Law four times so far) and thus substantially modify the institutional and legal framework as well as a number of fundamental aspects of public life;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 13 – having regard to the Fundamental Law of Hungary, adopted on 18 April 2011 by the National Assembly of the Hungarian Republic, which entered into force on 1 January 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Fundamental Law’), and the
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Recital T T. whereas any Member State of the European Union is absolutely free to review its constitution and whereas the very meaning of democratic alternation is that it enables a new government to enact legislation reflecting its values and political commitments, provided that, in so doing, it does not breach the values and principles of democracy and the rule of law prevailing in Europe;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Recital T T. whereas any Member State of the European Union is absolutely free to review its constitution and whereas the very meaning of democratic alternation is that it enables a new government to enact legislation reflecting the will of its people and its values and political commitments;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Recital T a (new) Ta. whereas there is not a "best model" throughout the rich and diverse European constitutional heritage, yet in all Member States special constitutional procedures render constitutional amendment more difficult compared to procedures governing ordinary legislation, namely through the use of a qualified majority, additional decisional processes, time delays and referenda, according to national procedures;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Recital U U. whereas the
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Recital V Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Recital V V. whereas the comprehensive and systematic constitutional and institutional reforms (a root-and-branch revision of the legal system), which the new Hungarian Government and Parliament has carried out in an exceptionally short time frame6 is unprecedented, and explains why so many European institutions and organisations (the European Union, Council of Europe, OSCE) as well as the U.S. Administration have deemed it necessary to assess the impact of some reforms carried out in Hungary, whereas the situation in other Member States, although following a different pattern, may also need to be monitored, while enforcing the principle of
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Recital V V. whereas the scale of the comprehensive and systematic constitutional and institutional reforms
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Recital V V. whereas the scale of the comprehensive and systematic constitutional and institutional reforms
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Recital V – footnote 6 Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Recital W W. whereas a cooperative and open dialogue
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 15 – having regard to the Second Amendment of the Fundamental Law, tabled on 18 September 2012 in the form of an individual member's bill in full accordance with the procedural requirements of legislative initiative and adopted by the Hungarian Parliament on 29 October 2012, introducing the
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Recital W a (new) Wa. whereas the Commission, in the exercise of its responsibility for overseeing the application of Union law, has to show the utmost skill, respect the independence of others, and act diligently, swiftly, and without delay, especially when it is called upon to deal with a case in which a Member State may have committed a serious breach of Union values;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Recital X X. whereas the adoption of the Fundamental Law of Hungary – which was passed on 18 April 2011, exclusively with the votes of the members of the governing coalition and on the basis of a draft text prepared by the representatives of the governing coalition – was conducted in the exceptionally short time frame of one month after tabling the draft law, thus restricting the possibilities for a thorough and substantial debate with the opposition parties and civil society on the draft text;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Recital X X. whereas the adoption of the Fundamental Law of Hungary – which was passed on 18 April 2011, exclusively with the votes of the members of the governing coalition and on the basis of a draft text prepared by the representatives of the governing coalition – was conducted in the
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Recital X X. whereas the adoption of the Fundamental Law of Hungary – which was passed on 18 April 2011, exclusively with the votes of the members of the governing coalition and on the basis of a draft text prepared by the representatives of the governing coalition – was conducted in the exceptionally short time frame of one month, thus restricting the possibilities for a thorough and substantial debate with the opposition parties and civil society on the draft text; whereas, however, it has not been established that such an exceptionally short time frame was unconstitutional;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Recital X X. whereas a need for a new constitution has been existed since the amendment of the communist 1949 Constitution in 1989, regarded as provisional; whereas the adoption of the Fundamental Law of Hungary
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Recital X X. whereas the adoption of the Fundamental Law of Hungary – which was passed on 18 April 2011, exclusively with the votes of the members of the governing coalition and on the basis of a draft text prepared by the representatives of the governing coalition – was conducted in the exceptionally short time frame of
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Recital X a (new) Xa. whereas the draft constitutional text submitted to the Hungarian Parliament on 14 March 2011 was the one produced by the elected representatives of the Fidesz-KDNP coalition and not the working document based on the discussions within the ad hoc parliamentary committee, even though that committee had been set up expressly for the purpose of drafting the new Fundamental Law; whereas this situation exacerbated the failure to consult the opposition;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Y Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Y Y. whereas the
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Y Y. whereas the
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 15 – having regard to the Second Amendment of the Fundamental Law, tabled on 18 September 2012 in the form of an individual member's bill and adopted by the Hungarian Parliament on 29 October 2012, introducing the requirement of voter registration into the
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Y Y. whereas the ‘national consultation’ on the draft Fundamental Law
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Z Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Z Z. whereas following a constitutional petition by the Hungarian Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, the Constitutional Court of Hungary annulled on 28
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AA Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AA AA. whereas,
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AA AA. whereas,
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AA AA. whereas
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AA AA. whereas,
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AA a (new) AAa. whereas the debt brake introduced in the Fundamental Law was among the first to enshrine the golden rule on responsible fiscal policy which has become one of the essentials of an emerging European economic union;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AB AB. whereas the use of cardinal laws in Hungary has constitutional tradition since 1989, whereas the previous Constitution contained 28 subject matters and the Fundamental Law of Hungary refers to 26 subject matters
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 17 – having regard to the Fourth Amendment of the Fundamental Law, tabled on 8 February 2013 in the form of an individual member's bill in full accordance with the procedural requirements of legislative initiative and adopted by the Hungarian Parliament on 11 March 2013, which
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AC AC. whereas since the adoption of the
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AD AD. whereas
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Heading I - Subheading 5 Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Heading I - Subheading 5 Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Heading I - Subheading 5 Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AE Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AE AE. whereas
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AF Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AF AF. whereas the adoption of a
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Recital AF AF. whereas the adoption of a large number of cardinal laws in a very short time frame, including the acts on the legal status and remuneration of judges of Hungary and on the organisation and administration of courts of Hungary, as well as the acts on the freedom of religion and on the National Bank of Hungary, inevitably restricted the possibilities for an adequate consultation of the opposition parties and the civil society, including dialogue between management and labour and the machinery for consulting civil society organisations, trade unions, and interest groups;
source: PE-510.840
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
activities/3 |
|
activities/7/docs |
|
activities/7/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Text adopted by Parliament, single reading |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
activities/5/docs |
|
activities/5/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/4/docs/0/text |
|
activities/5/date |
Old
2013-07-03T00:00:00New
2013-07-02T00:00:00 |
activities/6/date |
Old
2013-07-04T00:00:00New
2013-07-03T00:00:00 |
activities/4 |
|
activities/3 |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Debate scheduledNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
activities/4/type |
Old
Vote scheduledNew
Vote in plenary scheduled |
activities/3/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate scheduled |
activities/4/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Vote scheduled |
activities/4 |
|
activities/1 |
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2013-06-03T00:00:00New
2013-05-02T00:00:00 |
activities/1/docs/0/title |
Old
PE510.840New
PE508.211 |
activities/1/docs/0/type |
Old
Amendments tabled in committeeNew
Committee draft report |
activities/1/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE508.211
|
activities/1/type |
Old
Amendments tabled in committeeNew
Committee draft report |
activities/2/docs/0 |
|
activities/3/date |
Old
2013-05-31T00:00:00New
2013-06-03T00:00:00 |
activities/2/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE510.846
|
activities/3 |
|
activities/2/date |
Old
2013-05-22T00:00:00New
2013-05-29T00:00:00 |
activities/3/date |
Old
2013-07-02T00:00:00New
2013-07-03T00:00:00 |
activities/2 |
|
activities/1/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE508.211
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2013-04-23T00:00:00New
2013-05-02T00:00:00 |
activities/1 |
|
procedure/subject/2 |
Old
8.50.01 Implementation of Community lawNew
8.50.01 Implementation of EU law |
activities/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/1/shadows |
|
committees/1/shadows |
|
activities/0/committees/1/rapporteur/0/group |
Old
GUE/NGLNew
Verts/ALE |
committees/1/rapporteur/0/group |
Old
GUE/NGLNew
Verts/ALE |
activities/0 |
|
activities/1/committees/1/rapporteur/0/group |
Old
Verts/ALENew
GUE/NGL |
committees/1/rapporteur/0/group |
Old
Verts/ALENew
GUE/NGL |
activities/1/committees/1/date |
2012-03-20T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/1/date |
2012-03-20T00:00:00
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
activities/1 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
LIBE/7/09747
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|