2021/2071(INI) The creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget
Lead committee dossier:
Progress: Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Joint Responsible Committee | ['BUDG', 'CONT'] |
SARVAMAA Petri ( EPP),
GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider ( S&D)
|
WOLTERS Lara ( S&D),
KARLESKIND Pierre ( Renew),
KÖRNER Moritz ( Renew),
FREUND Daniel ( Verts/ALE),
GEESE Alexandra ( Verts/ALE),
OMARJEE Younous ( GUE/NGL)
|
| Committee Opinion | AFCO |
TAJANI Antonio ( EPP)
|
|
| Committee Opinion | LIBE |
REINTKE Terry ( Verts/ALE)
|
Lukas MANDL ( PPE),
Konstantinos ARVANITIS ( GUE/NGL),
Nicolaus FEST ( ID),
Anna Júlia DONÁTH ( RE),
Joachim Stanisław BRUDZIŃSKI ( ECR),
Klára DOBREV ( S&D)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 57, RoP 58
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 57, RoP 58Subjects
Events
2021/11/26
EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2021/07/08
EP - Decision by Parliament
Details
The European Parliament adopted by 529 votes to 150, with 14 abstentions, a resolution on the creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the EU budget.
The Commission must apply the rule of law conditionality regulation without delay
Members regretted the Commission's decision to draw up guidelines for the application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council on a general system of conditionality for the protection of the EU budget, which entered into force on 1 January 2021 and has been binding in its entirety since that date.
Parliament reiterated its view that the text of the Regulation was clear and that its application needed no further interpretation , as the co-legislators had not delegated powers to the Commission to do so. It recalled that the guidelines were not legally binding and that they could not amend, extend or restrict the text of the regulation.
Members also deplored the Commission's failure to meet the deadline set by Parliament for fulfilling its obligations under the regulation, including the preparation of the guidelines, by 1 June 2021.
Parliament called on the Commission to avoid any further delay in the application of the regulation and urged it to investigate as soon as possible and in depth any potential breach of the rule of law in the Member States which might affect the sound financial management of the Union budget. It recalled in this respect that the situation in some Member States already justified immediate action under the Regulation, by sending a written notification to the Member States concerned and informing the Parliament.
The Commission is invited to report to Parliament on a regular basis and at least twice a year on new and ongoing investigations, starting as soon as possible with the first cases, and to respond to the scrutiny of the lead committees in a timely manner by providing thorough information.
Breaches of the principles of the rule of law
Parliament called on the Commission: (i) to clarify in the guidelines that breaches of the rule of law in a Member State which result from decisions or events that took place prior to 1 January 2021 still fall within the scope of the Regulation as long as their effect is still ongoing; and (ii) to investigate in the Member States potential cases of breaches included in the list of indicative breaches of the principles of the rule of law set out in Article 3 of the regulation.
The resolution stressed the importance of cooperation between the EU institutions, the Member States, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the European Public Prosecutor's Office, while recalling that, in order to determine the existence of violations of the principles of the rule of law, the Commission should make an objective, impartial, fair and thorough qualitative assessment, taking into account relevant information from available sources and recognised institutions.
Members called on the Commission: (i) to include in its annual report on the rule of law a section on cases of breaches of the rule of law in a Member State which may affect the sound financial management of the EU budget and (ii) to set up a clear, precise and user-friendly system for lodging complaints, as well as deadlines for the Commission's replies to such complaints.
Protecting the EU budget
Parliament called on the Commission to take into account in its guidelines the fact that cases of persistent violations of democracy and fundamental rights, such as state discrimination against minorities, as well as attacks on media freedom and freedom of association and assembly, can have an impact on the projects to which Member States decide to allocate EU funding, and thus affect the protection of the EU's financial interests.
Members also stressed that the regulation should not be considered as a ‘last resort’, but rather that the Commission could use a wide range of procedures, including the regulation, to protect the Union's financial interests, to be chosen on a case-by-case basis according to their effectiveness.
The Commission is also invited to clearly indicate the criteria for determining the measures to be taken in cases of systemic breaches, such as those which hamper the functioning of the judicial system or the proper functioning of the entities whose task is to prevent and combat corruption, fraud, tax evasion and conflicts of interest.
Adoption of measures
Parliament recalled that the Council must act on any Commission proposal to adopt appropriate measures under the regulation within one month, which may be extended by up to two additional months in exceptional circumstances. It considered that the Commission should ensure that these time limits are fully respected for a timely decision and that it should define the rules and principles of transparency that it will apply in the event that the conditionality mechanism is triggered.
Protection of final recipients and beneficiaries
The resolution stressed that in cases such as serious corruption, nepotism, systemic fraud, illegitimate ties with political parties and conflicts of interest, the Commission should carefully evaluate on a case-by-case basis whether payments to final recipients and beneficiaries should be continued or not.
The Commission is called on to:
- set up a website or internet portal with information and guidance for the benefit of final recipients or beneficiaries and with adequate tools for them to inform the Commission about any breach of the legal obligation to continue making payments after measures pursuant to this Regulation are adopted, such as a simple, easy-to-use and structured complaint form;
- explain how it will implement an efficient and effective compliant mechanism for applicants, recipients and beneficiaries.
Documents
2021/07/07
EP - Results of vote in Parliament
Documents
2021/07/06
EP - Debate in Parliament
Documents
2021/07/01
EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2021/07/01
EP - Vote in committee
2021/07/01
EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2021/06/29
EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2021/06/22
EP - Specific opinion
Documents
2021/06/17
EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2021/06/15
EP - TAJANI Antonio (EPP) appointed as rapporteur in AFCO
2021/06/10
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2021/06/10
EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2021/06/10
EP - Referral to joint committee announced in Parliament
2021/06/04
EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2021/05/19
EP - REINTKE Terry (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in LIBE
2021/04/13
EP - SARVAMAA Petri (EPP) appointed as rapporteur in ['BUDG', 'CONT']
2021/04/13
EP - GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in ['BUDG', 'CONT']
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2021)598
- Decision by Parliament: T9-0348/2021
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A9-0226/2021
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A9-0226/2021
- Committee opinion: PE693.786
- Specific opinion: PE693.916
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE693.915
- Committee draft report: PE693.668
- Committee draft report: PE693.668
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE693.915
- Specific opinion: PE693.916
- Committee opinion: PE693.786
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A9-0226/2021
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2021)598
Activities
- Rainer WIELAND
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2021/07/06 The creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (debate)
- 2021/07/06 The creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (continuation of debate)
- 2021/07/06 The creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (continuation of debate)
- Tamás DEUTSCH
- José Manuel FERNANDES
- Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL
- Maria GRAPINI
- Zbigniew KUŹMIUK
- Janusz LEWANDOWSKI
- Terry REINTKE
- Petri SARVAMAA
- Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ
- Alexandra GEESE
- Pierre KARLESKIND
- Joachim KUHS
- Eero HEINÄLUOMA
- Margarida MARQUES
- Silvia MODIG
- Moritz KÖRNER
- Daniel FREUND
- Bogdan RZOŃCA
- Hélène LAPORTE
- Łukasz KOHUT
- Clara PONSATÍ OBIOLS
Votes
Élaboration de lignes directrices relatives à l’application du régime général de conditionnalité pour la protection du budget de l’Union - The creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget - Festlegung von Leitlinien für die Anwendung der allgemeinen Konditionalitätsregelung zum Schutz des Haushalts der Union - A9-0226/2021 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Petri Sarvamaa - § 7/1 #
2021/07/07 Outcome: +: 548, -: 111, 0: 36
The Left
NIA9-0226/2021 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Petri Sarvamaa - § 7/2 #
2021/07/07 Outcome: -: 482, +: 198, 0: 15
A9-0226/2021 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Petri Sarvamaa - Am 1 #
2021/07/07 Outcome: -: 349, +: 308, 0: 37
Élaboration de lignes directrices relatives à l’application du régime général de conditionnalité pour la protection du budget de l’Union - The creation of guidelines for the application of the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget - Festlegung von Leitlinien für die Anwendung der allgemeinen Konditionalitätsregelung zum Schutz des Haushalts der Union - A9-0226/2021 - Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Petri Sarvamaa - Proposition de résolution #
2021/07/07 Outcome: +: 529, -: 150, 0: 14
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 149 |
2021/2071(INI)
2021/06/17
BUDG, CONT
117 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation -1 a (new) — having regard to Articles 2 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas the Regulation entered into force on 1 January 2021 and has been binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States since that date to all payments made since the entry into force of the Regulation;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 c (new) 15 c. Believes that transparency implies, in particular: - disclosing the sources used by the Commission to trigger the Mechanism, - disclosing the content of the written notifications sent to the Members States, - disclosing the answers received from the Member States and the remedies proposed, - disclosing the Commission’s assessment leading to the potential lifting of adopted measures under the Mechanism, - keeping the European Parliament informed and involved at every step of the process to ensure the democratic scrutiny of the Mechanism and of EU funds;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Recalls that measures taken under the Regulation should be proportionate, in the light of the actual or potential impact on the sound financial management of the Union budget or the financial interests of
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Recalls that the appeal lodged with the Court of Justice of the European Union by Poland and Hungary on 11 December 2020 is defacto suspensive;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 b (new) 16 b. Welcomes the Commission's respect for the legal situation, as it wishes to wait for the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union, whereas Parliament is calling for the immediate activation of the new mechanism;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 4 Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Recalls that under the Regulation, it is essential that the legitimate interest of final recipients and beneficiaries are properly safeguarded;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Recalls that, unless the decision adopting the measures states otherwise, the imposition of appropriate measures under the Regulation does not affect the obligations of Member States towards legitimate final recipients or beneficiaries, including the
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Recalls that
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17 a. Emphasises that in cases such as severe corruption, nepotism, systemic fraud, and conflicts of interest, the Commission should evaluate on a case by case basis whether payments to recipients and beneficiaries should not be continued due to the recipients’ involvement in these breaches;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to implement Article 5(4) of the Regulation and swiftly set up a website or internet portal with information and guidance for the benefit of final recipients or beneficiaries and with adequate tools for them to inform the Commission about any breach of the legal obligation to continue making payments after measures pursuant to this Regulation are adopted, such as a simple and structured complaint form; calls on the Commission to explain how it will implement an efficient and effective compliant mechanism for applicants, recipients and beneficiaries;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the Commission decided to abide by the non-binding European Council conclusions of December 2020 and declared that it would develop guidelines for the application of the Regulation;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to implement Article 5(4) of the Regulation and swiftly set up a website or internet portal with information and guidance for the benefit of final recipients or beneficiaries and with adequate tools for them to inform the Commission about any breach of the legal obligation to continue making payments after measures pursuant to this Regulation are adopted, such as a simple, easy-to-use and structured complaint form;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Recalls that the Regulation shall be applied in a manner that ensures the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law, in line with the principles set out in Directive (EU) 2019/1937;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Reminds the Commission of its duty to do to its utmost to ensure that any amount due is effectively paid to final beneficiaries;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that, in shared management, measures under the
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that, in shared management, measures under the Regulation cannot be considered to affect the availability of funding for payments of legitimate claims to beneficiaries; recalls also that Member States concerned by those measures must regularly report to the Commission on compliance with their obligations towards final recipients or beneficiaries;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls on the Commission to analyse all information at its disposal and do its
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls on the Commission to analyse all information at its disposal and do its utmost to ensure that any amount due from government entities or Member States is in fact paid to final recipients or beneficiaries, which may entail recovering payments that have been made or making financial corrections by reducing Union support to programmes in line with applicable sector- specific and financial rules; asks the Commission to further clarify which other sources of funding could be used by Member States to ensure that they respect their obligations to final recipients or beneficiaries, when EU funds are suspended; asks the Commission to present its view on the management of a suspended EU fund in a concerned Member State;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls on the Commission to analyse all information at its disposal, including the use of all digital tracking tools, and do its utmost to ensure that any amount due from government entities or Member States is in fact paid to legitimate final recipients or beneficiaries, which may entail recovering payments that have been made or making financial corrections by reducing Union support to programmes in line with applicable sector-
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the Commission declared that it would develop guidelines for the application of the Regulation, following undue pressure by the European Council;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) B a. whereas, in its resolution of 25 March 2021 on the application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092, the rule-of-law conditionality mechanism, Parliament requested the Commission to adopt the guidelines no later than 1 June 2021 and after having consulted Parliament;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) B a. whereas the rule of law is historically a concept that has been instrumentalised for three years now by the European institutions, which want to punish Hungary and Poland for not accepting the distribution of migrants after the 2015 crisis;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Takes note of the Commission’s intention to develop guidelines for the application of the Regulation; reiterates once again its view that the text of the Regulation is clear and does not require any additional interpretation in order to be applied; further stresses that the legislators have not conferred implementing or executive powers to the Commission to precise the application of the Regulation;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Takes note of the Commission’s intention to develop guidelines for the
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Takes note of the Commission’s intention to develop guidelines for the application of the Regulation; reiterates once again its view that the text of the Regulation is clear and does not require any additional interpretation in order to be applied; acknowledges that methodological standards should be clarified in a timely manner;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Takes note of the Commission’s intention to develop guidelines for the application of the Regulation; reiterates once again its view that the text of the Regulation
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 a (new) — having regard to its resolution of 10 June 2021 on the rule of law situation in the European Union and the application of the Conditionality Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/20921a _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2021)0287.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Strongly believes that the Regulation is a key tool in light of the extension of EU budgetary instruments following the Covid crisis and in light of the urgent rule of law deficiencies in some member states; upholds that any guidelines or actions for annulment brought by individual member states should in no way delay the application of the Regulation;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. Deeply regrets that the Commission failed to meet the deadline to fulfil its obligations under the Regulation by 1 June 2021, which was clearly stipulated in Parliament's resolution on the matter of 25 March 2021; stresses that Parliament has clearly reiterated that it did not see the need for guidelines in the first place and that a situation in which the Commission accepts unilateral instructions on guidelines by the Council but lets a deadline set by the Parliament lapse is regrettable, especially in light of the fact that the preparation of the guidelines is delaying the application of the Regulation; welcomes therefore Parliament's overwhelming support on June 10th for launching Article 265 TFEU to bring an action for failure to act against the Commission;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that guidelines are not legally binding; notes that the Commission is deviating from its usual practice of drafting guidelines for the application of a legal act only in cases where the actual implementation of the act over a certain period of time shows the need for guidance; is concerned that breaches in some Member States are already fully advanced, therefore strongly urges the Commission to swiftly take all necessary preparations and actions without any undue delay;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that guidelines are not legally binding and by no means could delay the application of the Regulation already in force; notes that the Commission is deviating from its usual practice of drafting guidelines for the application of a legal act only in cases where the actual implementation of the act over a certain period of time shows the need for guidance;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that guidelines are not legally binding; notes with disappointment that the Commission is deviating from its usual practice of drafting guidelines for the application of a legal act only in cases where the actual implementation of the act over a certain period of time shows the need for guidance;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that guidelines are not legally binding;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Highlights that the European institutions exercise their powers in accordance with the Treaties and that the Commission should act as "the Guardian of the Treaties"; considers that the Commission has overcome its role as Guardian of the Treaties, becoming a political actor and exceeding the limits set by the Treaties;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Recalls that guidelines cannot alter, expand or narrow the text of the Regulation;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Strongly regrets the Commission’s failure to respond to Parliament’s request and to adopt its guidelines by 1 June 2021; reiterates its call on the Commission to draft the guidelines as soon as possible in close cooperation with Parliament ; reminds the Commission that Parliament already started the necessary preparations for potential court proceedings under Article 265 of the TFEU against the Commission;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 a (new) — having regards to its resolution of 10 June 2021 on the rule of law situation in the European Union and the application of the Conditionality Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/20921a _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2021)0287.
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Recalls that on 10 June 2021, Parliament instructed its President to call on the Commission, within two weeks, on the basis of Article 265 of the TFEU, to fulfil its obligations under the Regulation;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Recalls that the guidelines should only serve the Commission's internal process before triggering the mechanism by ensuring a predictible treatment for the cases brought to the Council;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Urges the Commission to avoid any
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Urges the Commission to avoid any further delay in the application of the Regulation and to investigate swiftly and thoroughly any potential breaches of the principles of the rule of law in the Member States that affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union in a sufficiently direct way; reiterates that the situation in some Member States already warrants immediate investigation under the Regulation and stresses the preventive aspect of the conditionality mechanism and the fact that it can serve as an ex-ante instrument;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Urges the Commission to avoid any
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Urges the Commission to avoid any further delay in the application of the Regulation and to investigate swiftly and thoroughly any potential breaches of the principles of the rule of law in the Member States that affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union in a sufficiently direct way; reiterates that the
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Recalls that the political guidelines for the European Commission 2019-2024 stated that 'there can be no compromise when it comes to defending our core values' and that it would be ensured that the full Union toolbox would be used at European level; recalls that the Commission ‘shall be completely independent’, and its members ‘shall neither seek nor take instructions from any Government’ in accordance with Article 17(3) of the TEU and Article 245 of the TFEU; recalls further that in accordance with Article 17(8) of the TEU, the Commission ‘shall be responsible to the European Parliament’;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 a (new) — having regard to its resolution of 10 June 2021 on the rule of law situation in the European Union and the application of the Conditionality Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/20921a, _________________ 1a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2021)0287.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Asks the Commission to report to Parliament on a quarterly or semi-annual basis regarding new and ongoing cases under investigation, starting as soon as possible with the first cases; calls on the Commission to start its reporting on the first cases under investigation to Parliament by October 2021 the latest;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Asks the Commission to report to Parliament on a
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Commits to a close scrutiny of the implementation of the Regulation whenever concerns arise regarding potential breaches of the principles of the rule of law in the Member States that fall within its scope; endeavours to organise regular sessions to monitor the implementation of the Regulation in the lead committees, under the guidance of the rapporteurs; calls on the Commission to respond to the scrutiny of the lead committees in a timely manner by providing thorough information;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Emphasises that any violation of the rule of law principle has to be seen as an attempt to put in danger the impact of the Union funds in the life of our citizens; therefore there cannot be a violation of the rule of law principle without a direct link to qualitative or quantitative violation of the the financial interests of the Union;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Draws attention to the non- regressive clause for the respect of the rule law established recently by the European Court of Justice: calls therefore for the Commission to evaluate the national rules that are regressive and can put in jeopardy the sound financial management and the financial interests of the Union; Court of Justice of 20 April 2021, Repubblika v Il-Prim Ministru, C-896/19, EU:C:2021:311
Amendment 46 #
6 a. Calls on the Commission to clarify in the guidelines that breaches of the rule of law in a Member state which result from decisions or events that took place prior to 1 January 2021 still fall within the scope of the regulation as long as their effect is still ongoing;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Urges the Commission to react swiftly to the ongoing severe violations of the principles of rule of law in some Member States causing a serious danger for the fair, legal and impartial distribution of EU funds.;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 b (new) 6 b. Urges that any explicit denial or refusal of execution of an European Court of Justice decision by a national authority should automatically be a cause to trigger the rule of law conditionality;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Stresses that the list of indicative violations of the principles of the rule of law is variable and exposed to arbitrariness and emotion;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 a (new) — having regard to the Commission communication of 30 September 2020 on the 2020 Rule of Law Report – the rule of law situation in the European Union (COM(2020)0580),
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws particular attention to the list of indicative breaches of the principles of the rule of law laid down in Article 3 of the Regulation; calls on the Commission to investigate potential occurrences of the breaches included in that list in the Member States, while pointing out that other practices or omissions by public authorities may also be relevant; notes that the Commission’s annual rule of law report from 2020 already contains indications of breaches in several Member States that may be relevant for triggering the Regulation;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws particular attention to the list of indicative breaches of the principles of the rule of law laid down in Article 3 of the Regulation;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Points out that the list of conducts of Member State entities relevant to the application of the conditionality regime laid down in Article 4 of the Regulation does not exclude the potential relevance of other situations or conduct of authorities that are relevant to the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Recalls that non-effective and untimely cooperation with EPPO and OLAF constitutes a legitimate and legal basis to trigger the conditionality regulation;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 b (new) 5 b. Recalls the importance of the cooperation between the EU institutions, the Member States and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the European Public Prosecutor`s Office (EPPO); welcomes that EPPO became operational on 1 June 2021 and highlights its crucial role in ensuring the effective functioning of the management and control systems for EU funds in the participating Member States;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13 a. Recalls that the non-effective or untimely cooperation with EPPO and OLAF constitutes a ground for action under the Regulation; stresses that in the case of EPPO, effective and timely cooperation entails not only an obligation for national authorities to actively assist and support the criminal investigations and prosecutions of EPPO but also for the national government to ensure that its European and Delegated Prosecutors are appointed in a timely and impartial manner; is also of the opinion that the systematic lack of follow-up to OLAF recommendations is an omission in the meaning of the Regulation;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Stresses the importance of supporting and strengthening the cooperation between the EU institutions, the Member States and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the European Public Prosecutor`s Office (EPPO).
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Recalls that for the citizens of these Member States that do not take part in EPPO, OLAF remains the only competent body to investigate allegations of fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union; urges therefore the Commission to assess the compliance by the Member States with the OLAF Regulation;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Recalls that for the financial interests of EU to be effectively protected, all Member States should complete and be part of the EPPO enhanced cooperation as swiftly as possible;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 d (new) 7 d. Urges the Commission to assess the compliance by the Member State with EPPO; points out that any political delaying of selection procedure of the european delegated prosecutors by the Member States should be seen as an attempt to jeopardise the activity of EPPO in the respective country and a potential danger of misuse of the public money;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 b (new) — having regard to the Commission’s reasoned proposal for a Council decision of 20 December 2017 on the determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law, issued in accordance with Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union (COM(2017)0835),
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Recalls that identification of breaches of the principles of the rule of law requires objective, impartial, fair and thorough qualitative assessment by the Commission, taking into account relevant information from available sources and recognised institutions; especially underlines the need to take into account final judgments of national, international and European courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice; calls on the Commission to include in its annual Rule of Law Report a dedicated section with an analysis of cases where breaches of the principles of the rule of law in a particular Member State could affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget in a sufficiently direct way and to establish a systematic relationship between these two separate tools;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Recalls that identification of breaches of the principles of the rule of law requires objective, impartial, fair and thorough qualitative assessment by the
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Recalls that identification of breaches of the principles of the rule of law requires objective, impartial, fair and thorough qualitative assessment by the Commission, taking into account relevant information from available sources and recognised institutions, including specifically the Parliament; calls on the Commission to provide information on how it will collect, analyse and evaluate this information when building cases;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Recalls that identification of breaches of the principles of the rule of law requires objective, impartial, fair and thorough qualitative assessment by the Commission, taking into account relevant information from available sources and recognised institutions, including information in the public domain and from fact-based investigative journalism;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Considers that the Commission’s annual Rule of Law report constitutes an objective, impartial, fair, and qualitative assessment of breaches of the principles of rule of law; believes that where the conclusions of the annual reports highlight individual or systemic breaches of the rule of law which affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union in a sufficiently direct way, they should be directly linked to the triggering of the conditionality mechanism; calls on the Commission to clarify, in the guidelines, a methodology to create a clear and direct link, when relevant, between the annual reports and the conditionality mechanism;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Calls on the Commission to use all tools at its disposal, including the Regulation, to also address the persistent violations of democracy and fundamental rights everywhere in the Union, including attacks against media freedom and journalists, migrants, women’s rights, LGBTIQ people’s rights, and freedom of association and assembly;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Calls on the Commission to set out a clear, precise and understandable system for the submission of complaints, including deadlines for the Commission’s responses to complaints;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8 b. Highlights that civil society, including independent NGOs and citizens, is at the forefront to identify potential breaches of the rule of law at local and national level, and should therefore be involved in their reporting; calls on the Commission to establish, in the guidelines, an efficient, user-friendly, and easily accessible online one-stop shop for citizens and civil society to report both fraud and corruption cases related to EU Funds, as well as individual or systemic breaches in their Member State, guaranteeing anonymity and leading, where deemed relevant by its services, to further investigations by the OLAF, the EPPO or the Commission;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8 b. Reminds the obligation under the Regulation that the Commission has to duly inform the Parliament about any written notification to any Member State, setting out the factual elements and specific grounds of the breaches of the rule of law; regrets that at this date, no written notification was sent, despite the deteriorating situation of the rule of law in the European Union and despite many concerns about the breaches of the rule of law identified in the Commission’s 2020 Rule of Law Report;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that measures
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital -A (new) -A. whereas the conditionality mechanism set out by the Regulation was part of the overall political agreement on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2021-2027, the Next Generation EU (NGEU) recovery plan and the Own Resources Decision, and should not be delayed in its application, in particular with regard to the application of the aforementioned instruments;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Recalls that the scope of the Regulation covers the activities of all government entities, including Member State organisations established as a public law body or as a body governed by private law entrusted with a public service mission, as laid down in the Financial Regulation; points out that any changes in the type of governance of an entity that is entrusted with a public service mission in a Member State cannot exempt that entity from the duty to comply with the Regulation;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Emphasises the clear link between respect for the rule of law and the efficient implementation of the Union budget in accordance with the principles of sound financial management: economy, efficiency and effectiveness; recalls that according to Article 5 of the Regulation, ‘the Commission shall verify whether applicable law has been complied with and, where necessary, take all appropriate measures to protect the Union budget’;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Emphasises the clear link between respect for the rule of law and the efficient implementation of the Union budget in accordance with the principles of sound financial management: economy, efficiency and effectiveness
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Recalls that the Regulation provides a clear definition of the rule of law, which must be understood in relation to the other values of the Union, including fundamental rights and non- discrimination; is of the opinion that state-sponsored discrimination against minorities has a direct impact on the projects on which Member States decide or not to spend EU money, and therefore directly affects the protection of the financial interests of the Union; calls on the Commission to take this into account when drafting the guidelines;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Calls on the Commission to address also the persistent violations of democracy and fundamental rights everywhere in the Union, including attacks against media freedom and journalists, migrants, women’s rights, LGBTIQ people’s rights, freedom of association and assembly;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls that the bulk of EU funds is implemented under shared management, with Member States having a primary responsibility for sound financial management, transparency and non-discrimination; in this light considers it imperative to supervise the proper functioning of management and control systems, for which the Regulation is a long-awaited and necessary instrument; recalls that measures under the Regulation are necessary in particular, but not exclusively, in cases where other procedures set out in sector-specific or financial legislation would not allow the Union budget to be protected more effectively; stresses that this
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls that measures under the Regulation are necessary in particular in cases where other procedures set out in sector-specific or financial legislation would not allow the Union budget to be protected more effectively; stresses that this does not mean that the Regulation is to be considered as a ‘last resort’, but rather that the Commission can use a wide range of procedures to protect the Union’s financial interests, to be chosen on a case- by-case basis depending on their efficiency and effectiveness; calls on the Commission to explain the modus operandi as well as procedural and technical standards regarding the examination procedure to determine in which circumstances the general regime of conditionality will be applied when sector specific measures or measures laid down in the Financial Regulation have proven to be of no avail;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital -A a (new) -A a. whereas the volume of the MFF 2021-2027 and the NGEU represents an unprecedented budget for the EU in its history that aims to support EU’s economic and social recovery following the consequences of the EU-Covid pandemic, and therefore requires more than ever timely and proper application of the principles of the sound financial management, as well as the protection of EU’s financial interests;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls that measures under the Regulation are necessary in particular in cases where other procedures set out in Article 7 TEU, in the Common Provision Regulation (CPR), in the Financial regulation or in other sector-specific
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Recalls that measures under the Regulation are necessary in particular in cases where other procedures set out in sector-specific or financial legislation
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Recalls the complementarity principle between the conditionality regulation and other procedures set out in Union legislation; calls on the Commission to use all the tools available for better protecting the EU values and the financial interests of the Union, such as triggering the conditionality regulation and starting infringement procedures against the violation of the rule of law principle based on the recent case-law of European Court of Justice;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that the Regulation covers all Union funds and applies to ‘systemic’ breaches as well as to cases of serious risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union, which may be difficult to address by other Union procedures that only apply to specific spending programmes and relate to effects on the budget that have already occurred; underlines that the Regulation is the only EU legislation linking the respect of the rule of law to the EU budget; considers, therefore, that its unique provisions should be fully applied to ensure a complementary protection of the rule of law in addition to EU finances;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that the Regulation covers all Union funds and applies also to ‘systemic’ breaches as well as to cases of serious risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union, which may be difficult to address by other Union procedures that only apply to specific spending programmes and relate to effects on the budget that have already occurred;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12 a. Recalls that the conditionality mechanism is at the very least illegitimate since it duplicates the procedures concerning respect for the rule of law, whereas only the procedure under Article 7 TFEU can determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach of the rule of law and the continuation of the procedures under way should therefore henceforth be the sole responsibility of the Council;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that ‘systemic’ breaches, for instance those affecting the functioning of the justice system, the independence of judges or the neutrality of public authorities, have in general a clear indirect impact on the proper management, spending and control of Union funds; considers that independence is violated not only when judges are subjected to the influence of political bodies, but also when them are in a situation of dependence on other subjects, such as trade union-corporate associations which have the substantial power to decide their careers and, consequently, are able to influence judges activities;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that ‘systemic’ breaches, for instance those affecting the functioning of the justice system, the independence of judges and the judiciary or the neutrality of public authorities, and in particular, the proper functioning of public entities with a mandate to prevent and fight corruption, fraud, tax evasion and conflict of interest have in general a clear indirect impact on the proper management, spending and control of Union funds;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that ‘systemic’ breaches, for instance those affecting the functioning of the justice system, the independence of judges or the neutrality of public authorities, have in general a clear indirect impact on the proper management, spending and control of Union funds; calls on the Commission to clarify how it will select and determine the measures in cases of systemic breaches;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that ‘systemic’ breaches, for instance those affecting the functioning of the justice system, the independence of judges or the neutrality of public authorities, have in general a clear
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital -A b (new) -A b. whereas according to the Regulation, respect for the rule of law is an essential precondition for compliance with the principles of sound financial management;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that ‘systemic’ breaches, for instance those affecting the functioning of the justice system, the independence of judges and media or the neutrality of public authorities, have in general a clear
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Underlines that ‘systemic’ breaches, for instance those affecting the functioning of the justice system, the independence of judges or the neutrality of public authorities, have in general a clear
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Recalls that Article 6 of the Regulation sets out all steps and a precise timeline for the adoption of measures under the Regulation; underlines that the procedure for adopting and lifting measures respects the principles of objectivity, non-discrimination and equal treatment of Member States and is to be conducted using a non-partisan and evidence-based approach; stresses that the Commission can still avoid that an action for failure to act is launched by taking the first steps stipulated in Article 6(1) of the Regulation without delay, and informing the Parliament thereof;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Recalls that Articles 6 and 7 of the Regulation sets out all steps and a precise timeline for the adoption and lifting of measures under the Regulation; underlines that the procedure for adopting and lifting measures respects the principles of objectivity, non-discrimination and equal treatment of Member States and is to be conducted using a non-partisan and evidence-based approach;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Notes that Article 6(4) of the Regulation foresees the possibility for the Commission to request additional information to carry out its assessment both before and after having sent the written notification; stresses that such requests before the written notification should remain exceptional and punctual so as to not jeopardise the precise timeline for the adoption of measures provided for in the Regulation;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Recalls that the Council is bound to act upon any proposal of the Commission to adopt appropriate measures under the Regulation within a period of one month, which may be extended by a maximum of two additional months in exceptional circumstances; calls on the Commission to provide information on how it will ensure a harmonised approach and coherent application of the budget conditionality across all its Directorates-General;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Recalls that the Council is bound to act upon any proposal of the Commission to adopt appropriate measures under the Regulation within a period of one month, which may be extended by a maximum of two additional months in exceptional circumstances; considers that the Commission should ensure that these time references are fully respected for a timely decision;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15 a. Believes that transparency is essential to foster the confidence of Member States and citizens in the conditionality mechanism: points out that each step of the procedure of the Regulation should therefore be taken in a fully transparent way;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15 b. Calls on the Commission to set up, in the guidelines, the transparency rules and principles that it will apply when triggering the Conditionality Mechanism;
source: 693.915
2021/06/18
LIBE
32 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph -1 (new) -1. Regrets that the Commission committed1a not to propose any measures under the regulation until it develops guidelines, whose finalisation is subject to the delivery of the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the action for annulment brought by Hungary and Poland; reminds that actions brought before the CJEU shall not have suspensory effect in accordance with the Treaties. _________________ 1aEuropean Council conclusions of 11 December 2020, https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/4 7296/1011-12-20-euco-conclusions-en.pdf
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Commission
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Commission has begun to draft guidelines on the application
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Deplores the time wasted by the Commission since the entry into force of the Regulation; urges the Commission to act without any further delay in the application of the Regulation and to investigate swiftly and thoroughly any potential breaches of the principles of the rule of law in the Member States that affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union in a sufficiently direct way; reiterates that the situation in some Member States already warrants immediate investigation under the Regulation;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2 b. Is strongly of the opinion that the Parliament has to continue its necessary preparations for potential court proceedings under Article 265 of the TFEU against the Commission; is of the opinion that non-action or slow action by the Commission is a strong political signal not only to the European institutions and the Member States but also to the European citizens;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Re
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Recalls that any guidelines must not
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Recalls that any guidelines must not undermine the adopted regulation or the intention of the co-legislators; stresses that the legislators did not empower the Commission to adopt guidelines, implementing or executive acts to clarify the conditions of application of the Regulation; asks the Commission to avoid strict or exhaustive definitions of the concepts, as this would be in contradiction with the Regulation; considers that interpretation of abstract concepts is a dynamic process which
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Recalls that any guidelines must not undermine the adopted regulation or the intention of the co-legislators; asks the Commission to avoid strict or exhaustive definitions of the concepts, as this would be in contradiction with the Regulation; considers that interpretation of abstract concepts is a dynamic process which cannot be predefined in one document; believes that the guidelines should fully respect the interpretation of relevant concepts by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Venice Commission; points to the obligation of ensuring the availability of EU funding to final recipients, in line with the Regulation.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Recalls that any guidelines must not undermine the adopted regulation or the intention of the co-legislators; asks the Commission to avoid strict or exhaustive definitions of the concepts, as this would be in contradiction with the Regulation; considers that interpretation of abstract concepts is a dynamic process which cannot be predefined in one document; believes that the guidelines should fully respect the interpretation of relevant concepts by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Venice Commission; points to the obligation of ensuring the availability of EU funding to final recipients, in line with the Regulation.
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Reiterates that the
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Recalls that any guidelines must not undermine the adopted regulation
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Considers that the Commission’s annual Rule of Law report constitutes an objective, impartial, fair, and qualitative assessment of breaches of the principles of rule of law; believes that where the conclusions of the annual reports highlight individual or systemic breaches of the rule of law which affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union in a sufficiently direct way, they should be directly linked to the triggering of the Conditionality Mechanism; calls on the Commission to clarify a methodology to create a clear and direct link, when relevant, between the annual reports and the Conditionality Mechanism;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. While acknowledging the complementarity of the Regulation with other instruments established by its Article 6(1), urges the Commission to make use of the Regulation since the other procedures set out in Union legislation do not allow for the effective protection of the Union budget from the grave, permanent and systematic violations of the values listed in Article 2 of the TEU that are taking place in some Member States;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Underlines that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation is to be applied in full respect of Article 4(2) TEU, notably the national identities of Member States inherent in their fundamental political and constitutional structures, of the principle of conferral, as well as of the principles of objectivity, non- discrimination and equal treatment of Member States.
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Is of the view that the Commission already has reasonable grounds to consider the triggering of the procedure in accordance with Article 6(1) of the regulation; and urges the Commission to act promptly and to avoid any further delay in the application of the regulation;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Calls on the Commission to clarify in the guidelines that breaches of the rule of law in a Member State which result from decisions or events that took place prior to 1 January 2021 still fall within the scope of the Regulation as long as their effect is still ongoing;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Underlines the complementarity of the annual Rule of Law report to the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; calls on the Commission to use the findings of the annual report as an important source in its assessments for the purposes of the regulation.
Amendment 27 #
3 b. Highlights that civil society, including independent NGOs and citizens, is at the forefront to identify potential breaches of the rule of law at local and national level, and should therefore be involved in their reporting; calls on the Commission to establish, in the guidelines, an efficient, user-friendly, and easily accessible online one-stop shop for citizens and civil society to report both fraud and corruption cases related to EU Funds, as well as individual or systemic breaches in their Member State, guaranteeing anonymity and leading, where deemed relevant by its services, to further investigations by the OLAF, the EPPO or the Commission;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. asks the Commission to include in its annual Rule of Law Report a dedicated section with an analysis of cases where breaches of the principles of the rule of law in a particular Member State could affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget in a sufficiently direct way;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Recalls that the Commission should continue to make use of all instruments of the Rule of Law toolbox, including infringement procedures according to Article 258 TFEU and procedures according to Article 7 TEU.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regrets the European Council conclusions of 10 and 11 December 2020 on the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation and considers that they contravene Articles 15 and 17 of the TEU and Article 288 of the TFEU insofar as they introduce unnecessary legal uncertainty and reiterates that the application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation cannot be subject to the adoption of guidelines
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 c (new) 3 c. Recalls that the Regulation provides a clear definition of the rule of law, which must be understood in relation to the other values of the Union, including fundamental rights and non- discrimination; is of the opinion that state-sponsored discrimination against minorities has a direct impact on the projects on which Member States decide or not to spend EU money, and therefore directly affects the protection of the financial interests of the Union;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 c (new) 3 c. Highlights that the assessment of individual or systemic breaches with regard to the rule of law requires an impartial, fair and objective treatment of Member States; the guidelines thus establish to this end procedures for conducting non-partisan and evidence- based investigations.
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 d (new) 3 d. Believes that transparency is essential to foster the confidence of Member States and citizens in the Conditionality Mechanism:points out that each step of the procedure of the Regulation should therefore be taken in a fully transparent way; Calls therefore on the Commission to set-up the transparency rules and principles that it will apply when triggering the Conditionality Mechanism;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Re
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Regrets the Commission’s intention to develop guidelines for the application of the Regulation; Reiterates that the application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation cannot be subject to the adoption of guidelines, and urges the Commission to avoid any further delay in its application;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Stresses that measures under the Regulation are necessary in particular in cases where other procedures set out in Union legislation would not allow the Union budget to be protected more efficiently; recalls that clear cases of breaches of the rule of law in several Member States are left unpunished and undermine the EU's financial interests;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that after the Commission
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Commission has begun to draft guidelines on the application of the Regulation
source: 693.941
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2023-08-03Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/0/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CJ13-PR-693668_EN.html
|
| docs/1 |
|
2021-12-18Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| docs/4 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| events/7 |
|
| events/7/summary |
|
2021-07-14Show (5) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/4 |
|
| events/5 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| forecasts |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's voteNew
Procedure completed |
2021-07-02Show (5) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/3 |
|
| events/4 |
|
| forecasts/0/date |
Old
2021-07-05T00:00:00New
2021-07-06T00:00:00 |
| forecasts/1 |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
2021-07-01Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| events/3 |
|
| forecasts/0 |
|
2021-06-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/2/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AD-693786_EN.html
|
2021-06-29Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/2 |
|
2021-06-24Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/1/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/AFCO-AL-693916_EN.html
|
2021-06-23Show (1) Changes
| docs/1 |
|