BETA

7 Amendments of Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ related to 2013/0407(COD)

Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
(9) This Directive acknowledges the different needs and levels of protection of certain aspects of the right to be presumed innocent as regards natural persons and legal persons. Such protection as regards natural persons is reflected in abundant case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The Court of Justice of the European Union has, however, recognised that the rights flowing from the presumption of innocence do not accrue to legal persons in the same way as to natural persons.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
(10) The Court of Justice of the European Union has, however, recognised that the rights flowing from the presumption of innocence do not accrue to legal persons in the same way as to natural persons. In the current state of development of national legislations and of case law at national level and at the level of the Court of Justice it is premature to legislate at Union level on the right to be presumed innocent of legal persons. Protection of the right of legal persons to be presumed innocent should be ensured by the existing legislative safeguards and case law, the evolution of which in the future should determine an assessment of the need for Union action.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
(11) Protection of the right of legal persons to be presumed innocent should be ensured by the existing legislative safeguards and case law, the evolution of which in the future should determine an assessment of the need for Union action.deleted
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
(12) ‘Law enforcement or judicial authorities’ for the purposes of this Directive refers to public authorities which, according to national law, exercise powers in the realm of criminal proceedings.deleted
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
(17) Any compulsion used to compel the suspect or accused person to provide information should be limited. To determine whether the compulsion did not violate those rights, the following should be taken into account, in the light of all circumstances of the case: the nature and degree of compulsion to obtain the evidence, the weight of the public interest in the investigation and punishment of the offense at issue, the existence of any relevant safeguards in the procedure and the use to which any material so obtained is put. However, the degree of compulsion imposed on suspects or accused persons with a view to compelling them to provide information relating to charges against them should not destroy the very essence of their right not to incriminate one-self and their right to remain silent, even for reasons of security and public order.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) The degree of compulsion imposed on suspects or accused persons with a view to compelling them to provide information relating to charges against them should not destroy the very essence of their right not to incriminate one-self and their right to remain silent, even for reasons of security and public order.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. "Law enforcement or judicial authorities" refer to public authorities which, according to national law, exercise powers in the realm of criminal proceedings.
2015/03/06
Committee: LIBE