[ParlTrack]

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 – introductory part

4. Urges the Commission to ensure that any such internal strategy is accompanied by a~~n action plan,~~ series of legislative proposals, in the context of the Treaties currently in for~~der to supplement and strengthen the~~ce, with a view to adopting a European Democratic Governance Pact in an effort to: (a) establish a scoreboard for democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights so that each Member Strate~~gic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy already applied in EU external relations; notes that the strategy should:~~ is assessed periodically. – With that aim in view, the Commission should set up a group of experts with a remit to establish the indicators by which democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights will be measured. These indicators should reflect the Copenhagen political criteria governing accession and the values and rights laid down in Article 2 of the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. – The indicators should be drawn up on the basis of existing standards, such as those developed by the UN and the Council of Europe, and the contributions of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, existing international bodies and civil society organisations operating in the area of human rights and fundamental freedoms should be taken into account.

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. b) expand the remit and structure of the Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). The founding regulation of the FRA should be amended to expand the Agency’s remit and power so that it can monitor the common indicators concerning the rule of law and fundamental rights and the additional human and financial resources it needs to carry out its new tasks, and do all this without detracting from its independence and impartiality, which are two of the Agency’s fundamental principles. – A rule of law and fundamental rights evaluation committee should be set up within the Agency (FRA Evaluation Committee) to analyse and evaluate the results of the regular monitoring of the indicators. – The FRA Evaluation Committee should publish an annual monitoring report containing a detailed evaluation of each Member State’s performance on the basis of the various indicators. – The Evaluation Committee could then recommend, on the basis of this annual report, that the Commission issue a formal warning if one or more indicators show that a Member State, or even several Member States, are violating the rule of law or fundamental rights.

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

Louis MICHEL, Gérard DEPREZ, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. c) establish a European Semester for democratic governance, the rule of law and fundamental rights: a binding EU mechanism; – Following publication of the scoreboard and the FRA Evaluation Committee’s annual report, the Commission, acting on its own initiative or on a recommendation from the FRA Evaluation Committee, may issue a formal warning to a Member State which has committed one or more violations of the rule of law or fundamental rights (in the light of the evaluation carried out on the basis of the Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Scoreboard); – A Member State which has been issued with a formal warning should have the opportunity, by a set deadline, to submit its observations on the concerns raised by the Commission; – After issuing its formal warning the Commission should carry out an in-depth analysis on the basis of the indicators, emphasising its concerns and taking account of any observations submitted by the Member state concerned; – In the context of a dialogue on the rule of law and fundamental rights, the Parliament’s committee responsible should invite the ministers of the Member State which has received a formal warning and the Commissioner responsible for an exchange of views on the concerns raised by the Commission and any observations submitted by the Member State. The Commission’s formal warning should also be specifically taken into account in Parliament’s annual report on the situation of fundamental rights in the EU. – The national parliament of the Member State which has received a formal warning may invite the Commission to a debate on the concerns it has raised and the specific indicators which have revealed a violation of the rule of law or fundamental rights. A formal warning issued by the Commission to a Member State should also be automatically included on the agenda for the next Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting, so that the Member States can exchange views and a possible Council conclusion can be drafted; – After concluding the in-depth evaluation which follows the issuing of a formal warning to a Member State, the Commission should decide – by a set deadline – if the concerns it raised have been properly addressed by the Member State concerned by making observations or taking corrective measures at national level; – If the Commission concludes that the concerns raised in its formal warning have not been addressed by the Member State concerned, it should issue a formal recommendation on the rule of law and fundamental rights in which it outlines corrective measures which must be taken by the Member State by a set deadline; – The formal recommendation issued by the Commission should be included on the agenda for the next part-session and the next Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting - and may be challenged by a qualified majority vote (reverse qualified majority). Any challenge to a formal recommendation shall be without prejudice to the activation of the mechanism provided for in Article 7 TEU; – If the Member State concerned has not taken corrective measures the Commission should launch infringement proceedings (if applicable) or activate the mechanism provided for in Article 7 TEU.

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

Louis MICHEL, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Gérard DEPREZ, Cecilia WIKSTRÖM, Frédérique RIES, Morten PETERSEN, Angelika MLINAR, Filiz HYUSMENOVA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Petr JEŽEK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4c. Calls on EU Institutions to consider EU Treaty change in order to allow for the Democratic Governance Pact (DGP) to be fully functioning, in particular by; (a) Expanding the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union by creating a new specific procedure to enforce the rule of law principle of Article 2 TEU in a Member State by means of an infringement procedure brought by the Commission or another Member State before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU); (b) Revising Article 7 of the EU Treaty, adding an 'application of Article 2 of the EU Treaty' stage, separating the 'risk' stage from the 'violation' stage, with different thresholds for the majorities provided for, a strengthening of technical and objective (not only political) analysis, enhanced dialogue with the Member States' institutions and a wider range of detailed and predictable penalties which are applicable throughout the procedure (Michel, 2013); (c) Including a reference to the FRA in the Treaties, including a legal base making it possible to amend the Agency's founding regulation not by unanimity, as is currently the case, but via the ordinary legislative procedure; (d) Creating a possibility for national Parliament to refer a draft national law to the CJEU for an opinion on its compliance with the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

2015/05/18
Committee: LIBE

4 Amendments of Morten PETERSEN related to 2014/2254(INI)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024