BETA

Activities of Barbara SPINELLI related to 2016/0412(COD)

Shadow reports (1)

2016/11/22
Committee: LIBE
Dossiers: 2016/0412(COD)
Documents: PDF(1 MB) DOC(179 KB)

Amendments (24)

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)

(7a) Extended confiscation and third party confiscation must comply with the guarantees enshrined in the ECHR, in particular articles 6 and 7, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The decision by competent authorities shall be based on a thorough assessment of the individual case of the person subjected to the confiscation order, including the certainty that goods confiscated were acquired or obtained through criminal activities;

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)

(13a) Extended confiscation and third party confiscation must comply with the guarantees enshrined in the ECHR, in particular articles 6 and 7, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The decision by competent authorities shall be based on a thorough assessment of the individual case of the person subjected to the confiscation order, including the certainty that goods confiscated were acquired or obtained through criminal activities.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) This Regulation does not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect fundamental rights and fundamental legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the TEU and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (hereinafter ‘the Charter’).

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) A confiscation or freezing order should be transmitted together with a standard certificate.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) IWithout prejudice to the right to information of any person concerned, in the execution of a freezing order, the issuing authority and the executing authority should take due account of the confidentiality of the investigation. In particular, the executing authority should guarantee the confidentiality of the facts and the substance of the freezing order.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 a (new)

(26a) The principle of ne bis in idem is a fundamental principle of law in the Union, as recognised by the Charter and developed by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Therefore the executing authority should be entitled to refuse to execute a confiscation or freezing order if execution would be contrary to that principle.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 b (new)

(26b) If there are substantial grounds for believing that the execution of a confiscation or freezing order would result in a breach of a fundamental right of the person concerned and that the executing State would disregard its obligations concerning the protection of fundamental rights recognised in the Charter, execution of the confiscation or freezing order should be refused.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 c (new)

(26c) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by Article6 of the TEU and in the Charter, notably Title VI thereof, by international law and international agreements to which the Union or all the Member States are party, including the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and in Member States’ constitutions in their respective fields of application. Nothing in this Regulation shall be interpreted as prohibiting refusal to execute a confiscation or freezing order when there are reasons to believe, on the basis of objective elements, that the confiscation or freezing order has been issued for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing a person on account of his or her sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion, sexual orientation, nationality, language or political opinions, or that the person's position may be prejudiced for any of these reasons.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32

(32) The victims' rights to compensation and restitution sh~~ould~~all not be prejudiced in cross-border cases. Rules for disposal of the confiscated property sh~~ould~~all give priority to the compensation and restitution of property to the victims. Member States should also take into account their obligations to assist in the recovery of tax claims from other Member States in accordance with Directive 2010/24/EU36. _________________ 36 Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures (OJ L 84, 31.3.2010, p. 1).

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32 a (new)

(32a) Property frozen with a view to later confiscation, and property confiscated, should be managed adequately in order not to lose its economic value, to encourage its reuse for social purposes and to avoid the risk of further criminal infiltration. Accordingly, Member States should take the necessary measures, including sale or transfer of the property, to minimise such losses and to favour social aims. They should adopt all appropriate legislative or other measures such as the creation of centralised national property management offices or equivalent arrangements, with a view to the proper management of frozen or confiscated property.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The issuing authority shall ensure, when issuing a freezing or confiscation order, that the principles of necessity and proportionality are respected.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

The executing authority mayust decide not to recognise and not to execute confiscation orders ~~only~~ if:

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

~~(c) there is immunity or privilege under the law of the executing State which would prevent the execution of a domestic confiscation order on the property concerned;~~deleted

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g a (new)

(ga) there are substantial grounds for believing that executing the confiscation order would be incompatible with the executing State's obligations in accordance with Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union and the Charter.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The executing authority ~~may~~shall decide not to recognise and not to execute the freezing order ~~only~~ if:

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)

(ea) there are substantial grounds for believing that executing the confiscation order would be incompatible with the executing State's obligations in accordance with Article6 of the Treaty on European Union and the Charter.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2

2. The notification shall contain information~~, at least briefly,~~ on the reasons of the freezing order, on the authority who issued the order and on the existing legal remedies under the national law of the executing State.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1

1. IWithout prejudice to the right to information of any person concerned, in the execution of a freezing order the issuing authority and the executing authority shall take due account of the confidentiality of the investigation.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2

2. The executing authority shall, in accordance with its national and EU law, guarantee the confidentiality of the facts and the substance of the freezing order, except to the extent necessary to execute it. If the executing authority cannot comply with the requirement of confidentiality, it shall notify the issuing authority immediately.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)

(aa) Each Member State shall take the necessary measures, such as the establishment of national centralised offices or equivalent mechanisms, to ensure that property frozen with a view to possible later confiscation and property confiscated is properly managed. Such property shall be earmarked as a matter of priority for the compensation of victims, victims’ families, and businesses which are victims of organised crime and for projects of public interest and social utility for projects of public interest and social utility.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4 – point b a (new)

(ba) Frozen property which is not subsequently confiscated shall be returned immediately. The conditions or procedural rules under which such property is returned shall be determined by national law.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4 – point c

(c) The property may be used for public interest or social purposes in the executing State in accordance with its laws~~, subject to the agreement of the issuing State~~.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 a (new)

Article 32 a Safeguards 1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the persons affected by the measures provided for under this Regulation have the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial, in order to uphold their rights. 2. Member States shall provide for the effective possibility for the person whose property is affected to challenge the freezing order before a court, in accordance with procedures provided for in national law. 3. Member States shall ensure that the time-limits for seeking a legal remedy shall be the same as those provided for in similar domestic cases and are applied in away that guarantees the possibility of the effective exercise of these legal remedies for the parties concerned. 4. Without prejudice to Directives 2012/13/EU and 2013/48/EU, persons whose property is affected by a confiscation order shall have the right of access to a lawyer throughout the confiscation proceedings relating to the determination of the proceeds and instrumentalities, in order to uphold their rights. The persons concerned shall be informed of that right. 5. In proceedings as referred to in paragraph 2, the affected person shall have an effective possibility to challenge the circumstances of the case, including specific facts and available evidence on the basis of which the property concerned is considered to be property that is derived from criminal conduct. 6. Third persons shall have the effective possibility to claim title of ownership or other property rights. 8. Where, as a result of a criminal offence, victims have claims against the person who is subject to a confiscation measure provided for under this Regulation, Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the confiscation measure does not prevent those victims from seeking compensation for their claims. 9. The issuing authority and the executing authority shall inform each other about the legal remedies sought against the issuing, the recognition or the execution of a freezing or confiscation order.

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE

Barbara SPINELLI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 2

~~2. The substantive reasons for issuing the freezing or confiscation order shall not be challenged before a court in the executing State.~~deleted

2017/10/27
Committee: LIBE