Summary for scraper logs from the 2024-09-19

File "/home/pt/pt2/scraper_service.py", line 69, in consume
    ret = scraper.scrape(**job)
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "scrapers/dossier.py", line 70, in scrape
    'committees': scrape_ep_key_players(root),
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "scrapers/dossier.py", line 193, in scrape_ep_key_players
    raise ValueError("bad html in EP key players, committee header")
ValueError: bad html in EP key players, committee header

File "/home/pt/pt2/scraper_service.py", line 69, in consume
    ret = scraper.scrape(**job)
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "scrapers/dossier.py", line 70, in scrape
    'committees': scrape_ep_key_players(root),
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "scrapers/dossier.py", line 193, in scrape_ep_key_players
    raise ValueError("bad html in EP key players, committee header")
ValueError: bad html in EP key players, committee header

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 2008/98/EC
Article 22d – paragraph 5 – point b

       Text proposed by the Commission                                                     Unchanged text included in the
                                                                                                          compromise

(b)      sorting for re-use operations sort                                      (b)      sorting for re-use operations sort
textile items at an appropriate level of                                         textile items at an appropriate level of
granularity, separating fractions that are fit                                   granularity, allowing from item to item
for direct re-use from those that are to be                                      sorting, separating fractions that are fit for
subject to further preparation for re-use                                        direct re-use from those that are to be
operations, target a specific re-use market                                      subject to further preparation for re-use
applying up-to-date sorting criteria relevant                                    operations, target a specific re-use market
to the receiving market;                                                         applying up-to-date sorting criteria relevant
                                                                                 to the receiving market;

on behalf of the ID Group

Report                                                                                                                         A9-0025/2024
Sophia in ‘t Veld
Report on the Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law report
(2023/2113(INI))

Motion for a resolution (Rule 181(3) of the Rules of Procedure) replacing non-legislative
motion for a resolution A9-0025/2024


European Parliament resolution on the Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law report

The European Parliament,

–        having regard to Articles 2 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),

–        having regard to Article 5 TEU, in particular the principles of conferral, subsidiarity and
         proportionality, which limit the powers of the EU,

–        having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

–        having regard to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,

–        having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure,

A.       whereas the Union is founded on values such as respect for human dignity, freedom,
         democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, which are common to
         the Member States;

B.       whereas any clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State or by the EU institutions
         of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU does not solely concern that individual
         Member State or institution, but has an impact on the other Member States and the
         entire EU, on mutual trust between Member States and between them and the EU, and
         on the very nature of the EU and its Member States’ and citizens’ fundamental rights;
C.       whereas Article 5(3) TEU states that ‘under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which
         do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and in so far as
         the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member
         States’;

D.       whereas Article 7 TEU sets out the procedure for instituting infringement proceedings
         against a Member State where there is a clear risk of violating the common values in
         areas falling under the EU’s competences;

E.       whereas, as an international organisation, the EU remains bound by international law
         and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), a treaty-based court, and, by
         virtue of the Member States being signatories to the Vienna Convention on the Law of
         Treaties, remains bound by the rules of interpretation and other provisions of the
         Convention;

F.       whereas there is no EU-wide legal definition of what the concept of ‘rule of law’
         entails; whereas the political procedures provided for in Article 7 TEU seek to bind
         Member States to a monolithic and centralised conception of EU law, putting the Union
         hierarchically above the Member States, while, on the other hand, they endeavour to
         supplant the traditional understanding of the rule of law, developed over centuries of
         legal practice, with a subjective framework of values and principles;

G.       whereas for several years the European institutions have been using the debate on
         respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights as a pretext to exert political pressure
         on certain Member States by urging them to alter policies falling within their national
         competences, especially by using Article 7 TEU for political gain;

H.       whereas the process is applied unequally as there are a number of Member States which
         have institutional procedures and state actions in place that contradict the traditional
         understanding of the rule of law, raising serious concerns about the report’s concept,
         methodology and sources, as it seems to apply ‘double standards’ when dealing with
         Spain, Hungary and Greece;

I.       whereas the Rule of Law Regulation1 is not intended to protect the rule of law, but only
         the EU budget, and the Commission should strictly comply with procedural
         requirements when applying it, including, in particular, proving a genuine link between
         the possible infringement and the impact or serious risk of impact on the sound financial
         management of the EU or its financial interests;

1.       Recalls that every Member State has its own national identity and constitutional
         traditions that are in line with European values and must always be treated with respect,
         objectivity and consideration for the principle of equality; underlines that the rule of law
         is a fundamental value for all Member States; expresses concern that abuse of the
         concept of the rule of law for political purposes undermines mutual trust and genuine
         cooperation between the Member States;
2.       Welcomes the fact that the rule of law is a fundamental principle in all Member States;
         respects the fact that Member States may attach different interpretations to the general
         concept of the rule of law because of their vastly differing legal traditions and case-law;

3.       Considers that cooperation between Member States is of particular relevance for
         advancing democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the EU; urges the
         Commission to uphold its own rules in the area of transparency, anti-corruption and
         justice and to comply with the European Ombudsman’s recommendations;

4.       Notes that while all Member States are said to be scrutinised in a similar way, there is a



1 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on
a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1.
         noticeable gap between theory and the practical reality;

5.       Expresses its concern that the rule of law assessment is implemented without a clear and
         precise definition agreed upon by the Member States;

6.       Believes that the Union’s repeated interferences with the Member States’ constitutional
         traditions further erodes their independence and sovereignty and imposes a single
         ideology on them; considers that politically motivated sanction mechanisms, deployed
         against Member States that dissent from this course of action, could lead to the arbitrary
         application of the values outlined in Article 2 TEU and pose a systemic threat to
         European cooperation;

7.       Underlines that, according to the Treaties, the Council is the competent institution to
         conduct Article 7 procedures and, in the spirit of mutual trust, must defer its decision
         until the end of its examination; notes, nevertheless, that the Council’s indecision as
         regards making meaningful progress in this process harms European cooperation, and
         urges it to conclude this procedure rather than organise any more hearings;

8.       Commits, in these areas and within the limits of the powers conferred on it by the
         Treaties, to apply the same criteria used in its previous relevant resolutions to all
         Member States and to the EU institutions with equal stringency, and to refrain from
         using EU treaties for political gain;

9.       Urges the Commission to comply with EU law and not to use tools other than Article 7
         TEU to protect the rule of law; recalls that, according to CJEU case-law, the Rule of
         Law Conditionality Regulation is specifically aimed at protecting the EU budget;
10.      Stresses that all the Member States are and remain the masters of the Treaties;

11.      Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the governments and parliaments of
         the Member States, the Council and the Commission.

2024-09-19T00:55:13.051373 plenary info scraping plenary: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-9-2024-0260_EN.html
2024-09-19T00:55:13.094124 pamendment error pagewidth is 682 > 200
2024-09-19T00:55:13.105567 pamendment info since pagewidth is 682 >= 245 we are clobbering it to 199 and margin to 24
2024-09-19T00:55:13.108840 plenary info adding A9-0077/2024-22 (A9-0077/2024-22)
2024-09-19T00:55:13.122230 plenary info adding A9-0053/2024-23 (A9-0053/2024-23)
2024-09-19T00:55:13.138176 plenary info scraping plenary am pdf: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-9-2024-0205-AM-010-017_EN.pdf