2018/2006(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1

– having regard to the Eighteenth report of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on the year 2017,

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas Article 3(4) of the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism (CETS No 198) ~~requires its States Parties to adopt measures which would introduce the reversed burden of proof~~states that in respect of a serious offence~~s, therefore requiring the~~ or offences as defined by national law, an offender to demonstrates the origin of ~~the~~ alleged proceeds~~; whereas States Parties are, however, required to implement this provision only to the extent to which i~~ or other property liable to confiscation to the extent that such a requirement is consistent with the principles of ~~their~~its domestic l~~egal systems~~aw;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas at regional and global level several ~~treatie~~conventions and mechanisms in relation to confiscation and asset recovery have been developed by the UN and ~~UN-affiliated bodies, but for var~~Council of Europe i.e. the United Nations Convention against Corruption of 31 October 2003, the United Natiouns ~~reasons, including the absence of political will to cooperate,~~Convention against Transnational Organized Crime of 15 November 2000, the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism of 16 May 2005, the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime of 8 November 1990, but for various reasons they do not always allow an effective and timely recovery of stolen assets;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)

Ja. whereas in accordance with Article 1, 3 and 14 of the Parliament and the Council Regulation883/2013, the European Anti-Fraud Office has a mandate to investigate everywhere where EU money is spent, including in non-EU countries receiving EU assistance;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas in accordance with Article 14 of the Parliament and the Council Regulation 883/2013, the European Anti- Fraud Office ~~has~~can entered in~~to some bilateral agreements that allow investigations to be carried out in certain third countries~~ Administrative Cooperation Arrangements with competent authorities in third countries, following prior coordination with the competent Commission services and the European External Action Service;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights the ongoing problem of EU funds lost owing to fraudulent cases in which funds are transferred to third countries;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the need, for the purposes of prevention, to avoid transfers of funds through financial intermediaries operating in non-transparent and uncooperative jurisdictions;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights with concern that funds from third countries may also be fraudulently transferred to the EU; underlines that the results of the preparatory action implemented by UNICRI on ‘Support to EU Neighbours to Implement Asset Recovery’ should lead to a broader and permanent EU programme to implement asset recovery;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that funds from third countries may also be fraudulently transferred to the EU; underlines that the results of the pEU funded Preparatory aAction ~~implemented by UNICRI on ‘Support to EU Neighbour~~for Supporting Arab Spring countries to Iimplement Aasset Rrecovery’ carried out by UNICRI should lead to a broader and permanent EU programme to implement asset recovery;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses the need to link the disbursement of funds to the publication of beneficial ownership data in order to facilitate the recovery of assets in the event of fraud;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the EU has unfortunately only concluded agreements on mutual legal assistance with a few third countries so far, such as Japan, the United States, Norway and Lichtenstein, despite the fact that it is suspected that funds are also transferred to other jurisdictions;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5

– having regard to the Commission report of ~~...~~3 September 2018 entitled ‘Protection of the European Union’s financial interests – Fight against fraud – 2017 Annual Report’ (COM(2018)~~...~~553) and the accompanying staff working documents (SWD(2018)~~...~~381-386),

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the EU has only concluded agreements on mutual legal assistance with a few third countries so far, such as Japan, the United States, Norway and Lichtenstein, despite the fact that it is suspected that funds are also transferred to other jurisdictions and calls on the Commission to encourage efforts to reach agreements with third countries receiving EU funding;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Regrets the fact that many Member States must currently rely on bilateral agreements and that there is no EU approach to this serious issue; ~~call~~stresses, therefore, the need for a more unified approach;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Strongly encourages the EU to become part of th~~Calls for the EU to advance its application for membership to the Council of Europe Group of States Aagainst Corruption (GRECO) as soon as possible, and to keep the Parliament up to date;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Strongly encoura~~Urges the EU to become part of the Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO);

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to ~~generalise the practice of adding anti- fraud clauses to~~harden its stance in agreements signed ~~by the EU~~ with third countries by adding anti-fraud clauses; regrets the fact that there is no data on the amount of EU funds lost annually owing to fraudulent cases linked to money transfer to third countries; calls on the Commission to calculate the amount of EU funds lost;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Invites the Commission to assess the risk and ~~highlight~~remove the sensitive points in EU laws that facilitate illegal money transfer outside of the EU;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission finally to establish a standardised data collection method to enable detection of the transfer of fraudulent assets to third countries, which would be identical for all Member States, with the aim of creating a central EU database in the future; underlines that such a mechanism exists to combat money laundering, and that this mechanism could be expanded;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to establish a standardised data collection method to enable detection of the transfer of fraudulent assets to third countries, which would be identical for all Member States, with the aim of creating a central EU database ~~in the futur~~as soon as possible; underlines that such a mechanism exists to combat money laundering, and that this mechanism could be expanded;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Highlights the need to create mechanisms allowing freezing of assets in third countries when they have been acquired by breaching EU law, inspired by the existing EU directives on mutual recognition and recoveryUnderlines that the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism of 16 May 2005 and the Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime of 8 November 1990 constitute important instruments facilitating cooperation with third countries related to assets freezing and asset recovery; welcomes successfully concluded negotiations on the proposal for a regulation on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders; notes that its main elements could be a useful basis to cooperate with third countries in the context of international conventions and bilateral agreements concluded by the European Union;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Highlights the need to create mechanisms allowing the swift and effective freezing of assets in third countries when they have been acquired by breaching EU law, inspired by the existing EU directives on mutual recognition and recovery;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9

~~– having regard to the 2017 Eurobarometer report,~~deleted

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Regrets the fact that not all EU Member States have agreed to be part of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO); stresses the importance of the EPPO becoming the key element of any future mechanism of recovery in third countries, requiring that it be recognised for that purpose as a competent ~~judicial~~ authority, in accordance with Article 104 of the EPPO Regulation, in existing and future ~~treatie~~agreements on mutual legal assistance and asset recovery, ~~whether bilateral or multilateral~~in particular Council of Europe and UN Conventions;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 12

~~– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A8- 0000/2018),~~deleted

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the diversity of legal and administrative systems in the Member States presents a challenging environment in which to combat fraud in the absence of uniform legislation at European level to combat organised crime;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the freezing and confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime in the European Union7 introduces minimum EU standards on the freezing of property with a view to possible subsequent confiscation and on the confiscation of property in criminal matters; _________________ 7 OJ L 127, 29.4.2014, p. 39.

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the Commission proposal 2016/0412 (COD) of 21 December 2016 for a regulation on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders introduces standardised means of cooperation among Member States;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

~~F. whereas none of these instruments can apply to third countries;~~deleted

Amendment 9 #