16 Amendments of Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ related to 2015/2287(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the institutions, agencies and other bodies of the European Union still fail to take fully into account the changes introduced byare unable to comply with the rules and the changes provided for in the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights when applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; notes and welcomes the recent judgments of the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice in the Digital Rights Ireland1 and Schrems2 cases, in both of which the Court based itself on the Charter when declaring invalid the Data Retention Directive3 and the Safe Harbour Decision4 respectively; stresses that the actual public access to documents and the management of registers of documents need to be based on standards which adequately comply with Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter; __________________ 1 Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 April 2014. 2 Case C 362/14. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2015. 3 Directive 2006/24/EC. Directive 2006/24/EC. 4 Commission Decision 2000/520/EC of 26 July 2000.
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the acEU institutions ofin the instituir actions and EUtheir policies have to be based on participatory democracy, thus ensuringe compliance with the principles of full transparency, by sharing, and informing citizens accurately and in good time;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that privacy and data protection should be respected while ensuring transparency
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that it is the duty of the institutions to carry on a continuingut regularly an open, and transparent dialogue with civil society so as to enable citizens to bring scrutiny directly to bear on the different stages of decision-taking – allowing them to become moreecome more informed and actively involved in the decision-makingEU democratic process – and on the legitimacy and effecexercise public scrutiny; recalls that transparency enhances citivzeness of governances' trust in the EU and mincreasures takenhe legitimacy of the EU Institutions;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know about, and scrutinise, the actions of their representatives, the decision-making process,nd hold accountable their representatives for their actions and the way in which public money is apportionllocated and spent, and the ensuing outcomes;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Deplores the fact that it is still difficult for citizens to gain access to information held by EU institutions, the reason being that there is no effective citizen-oriented interinstitutional policy based on complete transparency, communication, and direct democracy; urges the institutions to take a proactive attitude by disclosing; urges the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to further develop a more proactive approach on transparency by making publicly accessible as many of their documents as possible in as simple and accessible a way as possible for the public, having documents translated into all of the EU official languag, including on their internet websites, and establishnsuring proper information access arrangements allowingaccess for the needs of people with disabilities;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that a more proactive approach helps ensuring effective transparency as well as preventing unnecessary legal disputes, which might cause unnecessary costs and burdens for both the Institutions and the citizens;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges all the institutions, pending its desired revision, to fully apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in the proper manner; calls on the Council in particular to revise its rules, with a view to ensuring that all discussions,increase transparency on its documents, and information are made public,ts meetings and to produce transcriptsinformation of its public meetings;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Deplores the fact that citizens have no power to supervise trilogue negotiations; expresses concern at the abuses to which this legislative practice might lead, in particular as regards the role of lobbies and possible disparities in the treatment of persons seeking to keep abreast with developments in European legislCalls on the EU institutions to increase transparency on informal trilogues by increasing reporting in the competent parliamentary committee, which are web-streamed and public, on the state of play of trilogue negotiations;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Points out that, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and in order to guarantee full democratic and transparent parliamentary control, access should likewise be granted in a user - friendly way to documents produced when powers are delegated (delegated acts), since these make up a substantial portion of European legislation; considers it disappointing that no register of delegated acts has yet been established and calls on the Commission to set one up without delay;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that international agreements have binding force and an impact on EU legislation and points to the need for negotiations to be transparent throughout the entire process, implying that the institutions should be obliged to publish the negotiating brief conferred on the Commission; considers it regrettable that nthat documents related to them should be public in principle, without prejudice to legoitimations are secret and citizens have no access to information, but only to documents communicated to the press,e exceptions and without undermining the necessary thrus giving rise to speculation and misconceptions about the negotiations; maintains that the public should be given access to all of the parties’ relevant negotiating documents, in keeping with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001t between the parties concerned in order to achieve effective negotiations;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Points out to the Commission that it is required to inform Parliament fully and immediately at every stage while negotiations are taking place; welcomes that MEPs have access to relevant negotiations documents within the European Parliament;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Reiterates that full transparency of public expenditure in the EU is crucial to ensure accountability and to fight corruption;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission to tighten up its supervision in order to make managing authoritimonitor that Member States comply with the information and reporting obligations set out in Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 and, if necessary, to impose the penalties applicable for non-fulfilment of those obligations;