2017/2139(DEC) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Applauds the fac~~Points out that overall the three courts making up the Court of Justice closed 1628 cases in 2016, ~~the~~a number ~~slightly~~ lower than in 2015 (1775 cases closed) ~~but still very positive~~; reiterates the importance, with a view to upholding the fundamental rights of EU citizens, of reducing the list of pending cases;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Congratulates the Court of Justice on its remarkable productivity over the last year, with 704 cases concluded in 2016 (14% up on 2015), which was more than the number of cases referred to it (692), resulting in a slight decrease in the number of cases pending on 31 December 2016 (872), compared to the end of 2015 (884); 3a

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Expresses satisfaction also at with the work of the Civil Service Tribunal, which made it a matter of honour to resolve as many cases as possible before it was dissolved and its civil service jurisdiction transferred to the General Court (from January to August 2016, it resolved no less than 169 cases 4a);

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Welcomes the increase in the number of Advocates-General at the Court of Justice in September 2016, finally resulting in a full complement, which is very gratifying, given the growing number of cases raising new and delicate issues arising from the challenges the European Union has to face, such as the fight against terrorism, the migration crisis and measures related to the banking and financial crisis;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Welcomes~~Points out the constant growth of the accesses to ‘e-Curia’ application (numbers of access accounts: 3599 in 2016, compared to 2914 in 2015), and the fact that in 2016 all the Member States used “e- Curia”, showing that the public's awareness of the existence and the advantages of this application has been efficiently raised;

Amendment 15 #

Gilles LEBRETON, Marie-Christine BOUTONNET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Welcom~~Deplores the fact that the Court is working towards a gender balance in positions of high responsibility and that the European Parliament and the Council have indicated, among their objectives, a balanced representation of genders in appointing new Judges to the General Court (as of this date, five women Judges and two women Advocates General are part of the organisation chart of the Court and ten women Judges are part of the organisation chart of the General Court)gender balance at the Court of Justice of the European Union still has not been achieved and reiterates its call for more women to be appointed as judges.

Amendment 16 #

Mady DELVAUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Welcom~~Deplores the flac~~t that the Court is working~~k of effort by Member States towards achieving gender balance in positions of high responsibility and that the European Parliament and the Council have indicated, among their objectives, a balanced representation of genders in appointing new Judges to the General Court (as of this date, five women Judges and two women Advocates General are part of the organisation chart of the Court and ten women Judges are part of the organisation chart of the General Court).

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Welcom~~Notes the ~~fact that the Court is working towards a gender balance in~~efforts to get more women appointed to positions of high responsibility at the Court and that the European Parliament and the Council have indicated, among their objectives, a balanced representation of genders in appointing new Judges to the General Court (as of this date, five women Judges and two women Advocates General are part of the organisation chart of the Court and ten women Judges are part of the organisation chart of the General Court).

Amendment 18 #

Mady DELVAUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Considers that the Union institutions must be representative of their citizens; stresses, therefore, the importance of the goal set by Parliament and the Council.

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Notes that 2015 was the year of adoption of the judicial architectural reform of the Court of Justice, which was accompanied by the development of new rules of procedure for the General Court; understands that, by virtue of the number of judges being doubled in a three-stage process extending until 2019, that reform will enable the Court of Justice to continue to deal with the increase in the number of cases; looks forward to analysing the achievements of that reform in the Court of Justice's capacity to deal with cases within a reasonable period and in compliance with the requirements of a fair hearing;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Appreciates~~Points out that the budget implementation for the financial year 2016 represents a very high rate of use of final appropriation (98,23 %), even if slightly lower than the 2015 rate (99,1 %), due mainly to the gradual arrival in 2016 of 12 new Judges at the General Court;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Notes the upcoming recast of the Code of Conduct for Members where the conditions for carrying out external activities and the publication of their financial interests shall be clarified;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7c. Stresses that transparency is a key element to the public trust; calls on the Court of Justice to establish clear rules regarding "revolving doors" and to put in place effective measures and dissuasive penalties, such as the reduction of pensions or the prohibition to work at least three years in similar bodies, in order to prevent "revolving doors";

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7d. Calls for a greater level of transparency on the external activities of each judge; requests that the Court of Justice provides information regarding other posts and paid external activities of the judges on its official website and its annual activity reports;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)

7e. Considers that the Court of Justice should make available a general overview of the participants and the contents of its meetings with external parties other than the ones related to its judicial activity;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)

7f. Asks the Court of Justice to provide without delay the discharge authority with a list of meetings with lobbyists, professional associations and civil society; asks moreover the Court of Justice to present in due time the minutes of those meetings;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 g (new)

7g. Asks the Court of Justice to enact the submission of declaration of interests, instead of declarations of the absence of conflicts of interests, as self-evaluation of conflicts of interests is, in itself, a conflict of interests; considers that the evaluation of situations of conflicts of interests must be done by an independent party; asks the Court of Justice to report without delay on the changes introduced and to indicate who is checking the situations of conflicts of interests;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 h (new)

7h. Regrets the fact that the Court of Justice's internal whistleblowing rules where adopted only in the beginning of 2016;recommends that the Court of Justice disseminate those rules among its staff so that all employees are aware of them; asks the Court of Justice to provide in due time details of the whistleblower cases in 2015, if any and of how they were handled and finalized;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 i (new)

7i. Calls on the Court of Justice to provide Parliament with the specific costs of translation according to the harmonised methodology agreed within the Interinstitutional Working Group on key interinstitutional activity and performance indicators;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 j (new)

7j. Welcomes the commitment of the Court of Justice to ambitious environmental targets; encourages the institution to apply the principles of green public procurement and calls for the establishment of rules and a sufficient budget for carbon offsetting;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 k (new)

7k. Calls on the Court of Justice to improve its communications policy towards the citizens of the Union, e.g. by organising training seminars for journalists or developing communication products on its activity in accordance with a more citizen centred approach;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the budget of the Court of Justice is purely administrative, with approximately 75 % spent on persons working with the institution and the remainder on buildings, furniture, information technology and miscellaneous operating expenditure; stresses, however, that introducing performance-based budgeting should not apply only to the Court of Justice's budget as a whole but should include the setting of specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time- based (SMART) targets to individual departments, units and staffs' annual plans and to set relevant indicators for drawing up the institution's estimates; calls therefore on the Court of Justice to introduce the principle of performance- based budgeting more widely in its operations;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Highlights the improved efficiency of the Court thanks to the coordinated efforts of the judiciary and all auxiliary services, resulting in a 46% increase in the number of cases concluded over the period 2007-2016, despite a very limited increase in the number of auxiliary staff over that period (+ 3.5% if Croatian accession is included in the calculation and less than +0.1% if it is not);1a

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Notes that out of the commitments of missions of EUR 295.500 only EUR 41.209 were used; points out that this under-investment could be avoided; requests the Court of Justice to improve its budgeting and accountability in regard to the mission budget and emphasises the need for the principle of missions to be cost-effective;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Calls on the Court of Justice to consider in due time to reduce the number of official cars at the disposal of its members and staff; calls on the Court of Justice, furthermore, to improve its checks against the use of official cars for private purposes;

Amendment 7 #

Gilles LEBRETON, Marie-Christine BOUTONNET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Expresses its satisfaction that the first two stages of the three-stage EU judicial framework reform adopted by the European legislators in December 2015 2a had been almost fully implemented in 2016;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that the 2016 statistics for the three courts which make up the Court of Justice confirm the trend seen in recent years as regards the average duration of proceedings, which remains satisfactory (Court of Justice: 15 months for requests for a preliminary ruling (15,3 months in 2015), 2,7 months for urgent requests for a preliminary ruling (1,9 months in 2015), 19,3 months for direct actions (17,6 months in 2015) and 12,9 months for appeals (14 months in 2015); notes that those statistics contradict the arguments in favour of the Court reforms introduced in 2016 (an increase to the number of judges and the transfer to the Court of the power to rule, at first instance, on disputes between the Union and its staff);

Amendment 9 #

source: 615.318

2018/03/02 CONT 61 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1

1. Grants the Registrar of the Court of Justice of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Justice of the European Union for the financial year 2016 / Postpones its decision on granting the Registrar of the Court of Justice of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Justice of the European Union for the financial year 2016;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that the commitments for missions in 2016 were EUR 342 000 whereas payments were only EUR 157 974; calls on the CJEU to put more effort into better financial planning in order to avoid a similar discrepancy in the future;

Amendment 11 #

Dennis de JONG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Is concerned that the CJEU consistently overestimates the commitments required for missions and calls on the CJEU to reassess the amount allocated to the corresponding budgetary item when preparing its estimates for the 2019 budget;

Amendment 12 #

Petri SARVAMAA, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Welcomes the overall prudent and sound financial management of the CJEU in the 2016 budget period; expresses support for the successful paradigm shift towards performance-based budgeting in the Commission’s budget planning introduced by Vice-President Kristalina Georgieva in September 2015 as part of the “EU Budget Focused on Results” initiative; encourages the Court to apply the method to its own budget-planning procedure;

Amendment 13 #

Dennis de JONG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Requests the CJEU to introduce a more targeted performance based approach in respect of the external activities of judges for the dissemination of EU law, as the criterion used seems rather general and the effects of these activities are not clearly measured;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that the CJEU's budget is mostly administrative, with around 75% being used on expenditure concerning persons working within the institution and the remaining on buildings, furniture, equipment and special functions carried out by the institution; notes that, following the Parliament’s request, the CJEU has asked its administrative services to introduce the results-based budgeting principle in their field of activity; asks the CJEU to continue applying that principle in its daily administrative operations, and to report back to the discharge authority on its experiences, and the results achieved;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes the judicial activity of the CJEU in 2016, with 1604 cases brought before the three courts and 1628 cases completed in that year; also notes that the average duration of proceedings was 16,7 months which was slightly higher than in 2015 (16,1 months); welcomes the fact that due to reform of the CJEU the average time taken to decide a case in 2017 was 16,0 months; recalls the necessity to guarantee the quality and rapidity with which the CJEU delivers its decisions in order to avoid any significant costs for the parties concerned, arising from the excessive length of time taken;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Welcomes the fact that by 26 December 2020 the CJEU will draw up a report on the functioning of the General Court involving an external consultant which will be submitted to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Acknowledges that the Civil Service Tribunal ceased to exist on 1st September 2016 and therefore its activity must be considered over a period of only eight months; notes that it completed 169 cases and had 77 new cases, with a considerable decrease in the number of pending cases (compared to 231 in 2015, and 139 in 2016); ~~reiterates its call for an in-depth assessment of the ten years of the tribunal’s existence;~~ notes that an assessment of the functioning of the Civil Service Tribunal is contained in the CJEU’s proposals on the reform of the Court’s Statute which the CJEU addressed to the legislative authority in 2011 and 2014 and which was put forward to the Discharge authority during the 2016 discharge procedure;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Acknowledges that the Civil Service Tribunal ceased to exist on 1st September 2016 and therefore its activity must be considered over a period of only eight months; notes that it completed 169 cases and had 77 new cases, with a considerable decrease in the number of pending cases (compared to 231 in 2015, and 139 in 2016); welcomes the information included in the CJEU’s proposals on the reform of the Court’s Statute which was submitted to the Parliament in the annex of the reply to the discharge questionnaire for 2016; reiterates its call for an in-depth assessment of the ten years of the tribunal’s existence;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Notes the entry into force of the Code of Conduct for Members and former Members of the Court of Justice of the European Union which sets rules reflecting several of ~~the~~ Parliament’s concerns regarding declarations of interest and external activities; supports the CJEU’ in implementing its decision to set up rules on ‘revolving doors’ in 2018;

Amendment 2 #

Ryszard CZARNECKI, Dennis de JONG, Richard SULÍK, Petri SARVAMAA, Patricija ŠULIN, Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Urges the CJEU to publish curricula vitae and declarations of interest for all CJEU members, listing membership to any other organisations;

Amendment 21 #

Ryszard CZARNECKI, Dennis de JONG, Richard SULÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Regrets the absence of rules on 'revolving doors' and urges the CJEU to establish and implement strict obligations in regard thereto;

Amendment 22 #

Arndt KOHN, Caterina CHINNICI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes with regret that in 2016, the General Court exceeded the reasonable period of time within which a litigant is entitled to expect judgement to be delivered; calls on the Court to include in its annual activity report the number of cases where it exceeded the reasonable period of time, whether the litigant asked Welcomes the overall decrease of the duration of proceedings in 2016, noted by the Court of Auditors in its Special Report No 14/20171a by an average of 0,9 months at the Court of Justice and 1,9 months at the General Court compared to 2015; welcomes the organisational and procedural actions taken by the CJEU to enhance its efficiency and encourages the Court to pursue its effort to ensure the continuation of a downward trend so that all cases are concluded within a reasonable period of time; _________________ 1aCourt of Auditors Special Report No 14/2017 "Perfor man ~~indemnity and~~ce Review of case management at the amCounrt of ~~any corresponding payment;~~Justice of the European Union".

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Notes with regret that in some cases in 2016, the General Court exceeded the reasonable period of time within which a litigant is entitled to expect judgement to be delivered compared to the previous year; calls on the C~~ourt~~JEU to include in its annual activity report the number of cases where it exceeded the reasonable period of time, whether the litigant asked for an indemnity and the amount of any corresponding payment, complying with data protection rules;

Amendment 24 #

Petri SARVAMAA, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Maintains that information on the external activities of each judge should be made accessible to the general public and therefore published on the website of the CJEU and included in its annual activity report, including the name of the event, the venue, the role of the judges and the travel and subsistence costs and if it was paid by the CJEU or third party;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. ~~Maintains that information on the external activities of each judge should be made accessible to the general public and therefore published~~Reiterates its call for a greater level of transparency on the external activities of each judge; calls on the CJEU to provide information regarding other posts and paid external activities of the judges on ~~the~~its website ~~of the CJEUand include~~and in its annual activity reports in order to enhance transparency;

Amendment 26 #

Petri SARVAMAA, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Notes that one of two judges for the Tribunal of First Instance who were appointed on 1 April until 31 August 2016 was paid an installation allowance (EUR 18 962,25), in accordance with Article 4 (a) of Council Regulation (EU) 2016/3001a, travel expenses (EUR 493,10) in accordance with Article 4 (c) of that Regulation, and removal expenses (EUR 2 972,91) in accordance with its Article 4 (d); notes, moreover, that the same judge was paid a transitional allowance for six months amounting, in total to EUR 47 070, at the end of the mandate; criticises that the total allowance of EUR 69 498,26 is not proportionate to a mandate of less than four months; calls on the CJEUt to consider whether the duration of the mandate is proportionate to the above mentioned allowances when appointing future judges; calls on the Council to reconsider the conditions and amounts of these allowances and revise Council Regulation (EU) 2016/300 accordingly; _________________ 1aCouncil Regulation (EU) 2016/300 of 29 February 2016 determining the emoluments of EU high-level public office holders (OJ L 58, 4.3.2016, p. 1).

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Is of the opinion that the CJEU should consider produceing minutes of meetings held with lobbyists, professional associations and civil society actors, when this does not undermine the confidentiality of ongoing cases;

Amendment 28 #

Ryszard CZARNECKI, Richard SULÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13 a. Asks the CJEU to publish the meetings with the professional associations as well as agents representing the Member States;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Criticises the Court for refusing access for the Court of Auditors to all the documents relevant in audit of the performance review of the CJEU and for only allowing the auditors to consult publicly available documents; remiNotes that the Court justifiably refused the Court of Auditors access to certain documents, such as internal notes and memoranda between the Registry ands the CJEU that the Court of Auditors’ Members and its auditors are bound by confidentiality and professional secrecy in the performance of their duties6 ; regrets that référendaires could not be interviewed despite their crucial role in the CJEU’s work; _________________ 6Please see the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Court of Auditors in article 6 and the Ethical guidelines for the European Court of Auditors applying to the staff in paragraph 4 concerning professional secrecy.Judges/Advocates-General and certain parts of the Judge’s preliminary reports; regrets that référendaires could not be interviewed despite their crucial role in the CJEU’s work;

Amendment 3 #

Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1

Amendment 30 #

Arndt KOHN, Caterina CHINNICI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Criticises the Court for refusing access for the Court of Auditors to all the documents relevant in audit of the performance review of the CJEU and for only allowing the auditors to consult publicly available documents; reminds the CJEU that the Court of Auditors’ Members and its auditors are bound by confidentiality and professional secrecy in the performance of their duties6 ; regrets that référendaires could not be interviewed despite their crucial role in the CJEU’s work; _________________ 6Please see the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Court of Auditors in article 6 and the Ethical guidelines for the European Court of Auditors applying to the staff in paragraph 4 concerning professional secrecyNotes that the Court of Auditors did not have access to certain documents; underlines that some documents should remain restricted to the Judges, Advocates-General and selected CJEU staff due to the Treaty obligation to maintain the secrecy of the deliberative process6a; calls on the CJEU to provide access for the Court of Auditors to all documents it needs for its audits to the extent as this does not infringe the obligation to maintain secrecy of the deliberative process; _________________ 6aArticle 35 of Protocol No 3 on the Statute of the Court of the European Union.

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. ~~Criticises~~Notes with concern that the Court ~~for~~ refus~~ing~~ed the access for the Court of Auditors to all the documents relevant in audit of the performance review of the CJEU ~~and for only allowing the auditors to consult publicly available documents~~; reminds the CJEU that the Court of Auditors’ Members and its auditors are bound by confidentiality and professional secrecy in the performance of their duties6 ; calls to the CJEU to keep on working with the Court of Auditors and keep on improving its cooperation with the auditors providing all the necessary documents when they do not compromise the duties of the CJEU or the data protection rules; regrets that référendaires could not be interviewed despite their crucial role in the CJEU’s work; _________________ 6 Please see the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Court of Auditors in article 6 and the Ethical guidelines for the European Court of Auditors applying to the staff in paragraph 4 concerning professional secrecy.

Amendment 32 #

Marco VALLI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Criticises the Court for refusing ~~access for~~ the Court of Auditors ~~to all the documents relevant in audit of the performance review of the CJEU and for only allowing the auditors to consult publicly available documents~~access to some of the documents requested with regard to the performance review of the CJEU; reminds the CJEU that the Court of Auditors’ Members and its auditors are bound by confidentiality and professional secrecy in the performance of their duties6 ; regrets that référendaires could not be interviewed despite their crucial role in the CJEU’s work; _________________ 6Please see the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Court of Auditors in article 6 and the Ethical guidelines for the European Court of Auditors applying to the staff in paragraph 4 concerning professional secrecy.

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Criticises the Court for refusing access for the Court of Auditors to ~~all~~some of the documents ~~relevant in audit~~they requested for of the performance review of the CJEU and for only allowing the auditors to consult publicly available documents; reminds the CJEU that the Court of Auditors’ Members and its auditors are bound by confidentiality and professional secrecy in the performance of their duties6 ; regrets that référendaires could not be interviewed despite their crucial role in the CJEU’s work; _________________ 6 Please see the Code of Conduct for Members of the European Court of Auditors in article 6 and the Ethical guidelines for the European Court of Auditors applying to the staff in paragraph 4 concerning professional secrecy.

Amendment 34 #

Arndt KOHN, Caterina CHINNICI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Not~~Underlines that the role of the référendaires ~~are very influential within the CJEU but that their role and the rules governing their conduct remain unknown to the outside world~~is to assist the Members of the Court in examining cases and in drafting under their supervision legal documents, such as judgments, orders, opinions or memoranda; underlines that the decision from 2009 related to the rules of conduct of these agents is still in force;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes that the r~~éférendaires are very influential within the CJEU but that their role and the rules govern~~ules of conduct for référendaires were adopted by the CJEU in 2009 and have been provided to the Committee of Budgetary Control ing the~~ir conduct remain unknown to the outside world~~ CJEU’s reply to the questionnaire concerning the 2016 discharge;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes that the référendaires are very influential within the CJEU but that their role and the rules governing their conduct remain unknown to the outside world; notes that référendaires are selected by the Members for whom they will work and that there are minimum recruitment criteria; calls on the CJEU to implement a policy allowing for a more flexible allocation of existing référendaires to help mitigate problems;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Notes with concern that the CJEU could not evaluate the capacity of judges and référendaires managing cases because the CJEU does not collect any information on the amount of time a judge or a référendaire spent on a case; notes that a study will be carried out in order to evaluate the extent to which the introduction of a system for monitoring the use of resources would provide useful data; asks the CJEU to present the results of the study to the European Parliament;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15 b. Considers the answer given by the CJEU to Parliament’s question (Question 50) on the costs of their cases to be unsatisfactory; asks the CJEU to consider a monitoring system to calculate the costs of each case;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)

15 c. Notes the permanent monitoring of the evolution of potential backlog and delays within chambers; regrets that the CJEU has not reported to Parliament on data relating to the failure to comply with indicative time frames because it concerns the internal organisation of the Courts;

Amendment 4 #

Marco VALLI

Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)

15 d. Notes with concern that one of the most frequent factors affecting the duration of the handling of cases are judicial vacations1a; notes that there were 14 weeks of judicial vacations in 2016; asks the greffier to propose solutions to the European Parliament; _________________ 1a See ECA Special report no 14/2017: Performance review of case management at the Court of Justice of the European Union, p. 31

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)

15 e. Is concerned that the reception and processing of procedural documents by the registry is the most frequent factor affecting the duration of the written procedure at the General Court1a; notes that the cases before the General Court are notably characterised by the volume of the documents; calls on the General Court to further monitor the number and complexity of cases in order to ensure that the registry has sufficient resources; _________________ 1a See ECA Special report no 14/2017: Performance review of case management at the Court of Justice of the European Union, p. 27

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 f (new)

15 f. Underlines the recommendation of the Court of Auditors in its Special Report No 14/2017 to measure performance on a case by case basis by reference to a tailored time-frame, taking account of the actual resources employed;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes that following the reform of the CJEU’s judicial structure, the allocation of judges to the chambers is made according to the caseload in different areas; is interested to know how this allocation is made and whether specialised chambers are in place for certain areas; and asks for an analysis how the allocation affects the speed of the handling of cases

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Notes the process for assigning cases referred to the Courts; notes that in 2016, as in the previous years, around 40% of cases in the General Court were assigned outside of the rota system, which puts the system itself into question; asks the CJEU to provide the rules stipulating the procedure of assignment in both Courts;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes the high rate of occupation of posts (almost 98%) despite the high staff turnover rate; notes the difficulties stated by the CJEU with recruiting permanent staff in entry-level grades; asks for an assessment by the CJEU on the reasons of the high turnover and the measures put in place or intended to put in place to improve the situation;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20 a. Observes that the 5% staff reduction agreement has led to institutions increasingly hiring staff with temporary contracts; regrets that internal competitions are organised with the aim and result of retaining staff that have previously held the same position under previous temporary contracts; considers it more cost and time efficient as well as transparent and fair if well-performing staff with temporary contracts would be switched to permanent contracts without the added financial and administrative burden of organising competitions with pre-determined outcomes at the expense of disappointing outside applicants;

Amendment 47 #

Petri SARVAMAA, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Encourages the CJEU’s actions taken in 2016 to improve gender balance in senior and middle-management posts; noreiterates withs concern on the geographic imbalance at middle and senior management level and calls on the CJEU to work towards improvements in this regard;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. ~~Encoura~~Acknowledges the CJEU’s actions taken in 2016 to improve gender balance in senior and middle-management posts; notes ~~with concern~~ the geographic imbalance at middle and senior management level and calls on the CJEU to ~~work~~aim towards improvements in this regard;

Amendment 49 #

Ryszard CZARNECKI, Raffaele FITTO, Notis MARIAS, Beata GOSIEWSKA, Richard SULÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24 a. Notes that the CJEU offered 245 traineeships in 2016; regrets that 188 traineeships in cabinets were not remunerated; calls on the CJEU to find a solution to provide a decent remuneration to all trainees working in the institution with a view to ensuring equal opportunities;

Amendment 5 #

Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Grants the Registrar of the Court of Justice of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Justice of the European Union for the financial year 2016 /~~ Postpones its decision on granting the Registrar of the Court of Justice of the European Union discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Court of Justice of the European Union for the financial year 2016;

Amendment 50 #

Petri SARVAMAA, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Notes the CJEU’s investment in IT tools to improve case management; asks the CJEU to provide detailed financial information on and the state of play of IT projects within the CJEU since 2014; calls on the CJEU to develop a fully integrated IT system to support case management;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Notes the CJEU’s investment in IT tools to improve case management; asks the CJEU to provide ~~detailed~~quantitative and qualitative financial information on IT projects within the CJEU since 2014;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25 a. Notes that the CJEU has increased its communication activities in order to make itself more accessible to citizens; welcomes the fact that the CJEU has taken the decision to update its website in order to be more user friendly and asks the CJEU to make efforts to improve its database by making it more focused on users; congratulates the CJEU on its efforts with regard to online communication channels and encourages it to keep up the good work;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Notes that the CJEU followed up on the Parliament’s recommendation on the use of official vehicles in the 2015 discharge resolution in a phased manner; finds that the actions taken to rationalise the management of the fleet go in the right direction; welcomes the new interinstitutional call for tender on car leasing procurement procedure launched in 2016 which aims to provide economic savings in this regard; notes with concern that in 2016, 21 flights were arranged at a cost of EUR 3 998,97 in order to send drivers on mission to chauffeur members of the Court of Justice or of the Tribunal in the home Member States of those members;

Amendment 54 #

Ryszard CZARNECKI, Dennis de JONG, Richard SULÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28 a. Notes the further experience gained as to open space offices; is concerned that advantages such as the reduction of space needs, gains in terms of easier communication and higher flexibility could be outbalanced by lower confidentiality, constraints on work on files which require high concentration and a loss of privacy; calls on the CJEU to evaluate the positive and negative effects on working conditions, taking into consideration the staff's needs, and to inform the Parliament about the result of this evaluation;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Welcomes the CJEU’s adoption of guidelines on information for and protection of whistleblowers in the beginning of 2016 and recalls that the protection of whistleblowers is one of the main issues in public administration.; calls on the CJEU to provide its staff with training on the 2016 guidelines, highlighting whistleblowers' vital role in bringing wrongdoing to light; calls on the CJEU to encourage its staff to take advantage of the 2016 guidelines in appropriate cases;

Amendment 56 #

Petri SARVAMAA, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Welcomes the CJEU’s adoption of guidelines on information for and protection of whistleblowers in the beginning of 2016 and recalls that the protection of whistleblowers is ~~one of the main issues in public administration.~~ an issue taken seriously within the public administration of the Union and shall always be considered carefully;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29 a. Expresses the need to establish an independent disclosure, advice and referral body with sufficient budgetary resources, in order to help whistleblowers use the right channels to disclose information on possible irregularities affecting the financial interests of the Union, while protecting their confidentiality and offering needed support and advice;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29 a. Notes that the nomination of the Members of the European Court of Justice is the responsibility of the Member States under Article 253 TFEU; highlights the importance of the timely nomination and appointment of Judges for the performance of the CJEU; asks for a new rule setting a specific deadline for the (re)nomination of a judge well before the end of a judge’s mandate and calls on the Council to respect the cost- benefit-ratio when appointing new judges to the CJEU; criticises the irregular nomination without a call for applications of two judges for the Tribunal of First Instance for a mandate which moreover lasted only from 14 April 2016 until 31 August 2016; notes with regret the costs of the taking up and the ending of one of the "4 month mandates" to the amount of EUR 69 498,25 in addition to the salary the judge received; condemns such a waste of EU taxpayers money;

Amendment 59 #

Petri SARVAMAA, José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29 a. Regrets the decision by the UK to withdraw from the European Union; observes that at this point no predictions can be made about the financial, administrative, human and other consequences related to the withdrawal, asks the Council and the Court of Auditors to perform impact assessments and inform the European Parliament on the results by the end of the year 2018;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that in 2016, the CJEU had appropriations amounting to EUR 380 002 000 (compared to EUR 357 062 000 in 2015) and that the implementation rate was 98,2%; ~~notes the decreas~~acknowledges the high rate of ~~the~~ utilisation ~~rate when~~; notes, however, a slight decrease compared to previous years;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)

29 b. Notes furthermore that the General Court (Appeal Chamber, judgment of 23 January 2018 in Case T- 639/16 P)1a considers the Second Chamber of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union with one of the"4 month mandate" judges as an irregular one, which makes void this and all further legal acts of the Second Chamber in that composition; asks the CJEU which legal acts of the Second Chamber in that composition are affected by the General Court ruling; demands that the Council comments on this failure and clarifies who takes responsibility for this; _________________ 1a ECLI:EU:T:2018:22.

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)

29 c. Asks the CJEU to consider extending the languages of deliberation of the CJEU, in particular the General Court, to languages other than French; welcomes the request of the President of the General Court in February 2016 for an impact assessment of a change of the language of deliberation that has not yet been finalized;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Notes that the estimated revenue of the CJEU for the financial year 2016 was EUR 51 505 000 whereas the established entitlements were 3,1 % lower than estimated (EUR 49 886 228); notes that the difference of EUR 1,62 million is mainly attributed to the late arrival in 2016 of 16 of the 19 additional judges at the General Court;

Amendment 8 #