Activities of Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA related to 2021/2180(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law Report (debate)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law report
Amendments (36)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
— having regard especially to the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Cases C-156/21 Hungary v Parliament and Council Press and Information and C-157/21 Poland v Parliament and Council;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the important role of the Committee on Petitions in identifying and flagging possible breaches of the rule of law, taking into account the numerous petitions received from citizens concerned about breaches of the rule of law in several Member States; strongly believes that full protection of all EU citizens can only be ensured throughout the Union if all Member States comply with all principles of the rule of law; stresses that the Rule of Law Report must be objective and assess all Member States according to the same criteria;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that the rule of law includes principles such as legality, legal certainty, the separation of powers, the prohibition of the arbitrary exercise of executive power, effective judicial protection by independent and impartial courts in full respect of fundamental rights, the fight against impunity, the enforcement of judgments including the permanent subjection of all public authorities to established laws and procedures, and equality before the law;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that judicial accountability and, prosecutorial and judicial independence and the enforcement of judgments are crucial components of the rule of law; calls on the Commission to enforce these core EU values when they are infringed by Member States in order to increase citizens’ trust in the judiciaryor when Member States fail to act on violations carried out by sub-state entities, in order to increase citizens’ trust in the judiciary, and by using all means at their disposal, especially the rule of law conditionality mechanism, where applicable;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission to develop proposals to further strengthening of the Rule of Law toolbox if, despite the current instruments and efforts, significant violations of the values enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU persist; proposes to expand the scope of the non- discrimination clause in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, and to render it universal, to enable the enforcement of the Rule of Law in Member States and the Union consistent with article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights; calls, in the meantime, on all EU institutions to give the non-discrimination clause the broadest possible legal interpretation;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that emergency regimes and decree-laws were urgently instated by governments in several Member States because of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that this has affected the functioning of the national justice systems and the activity of the courts; draws attention toregrets the lack of participation and the non-involvement of national parliaments in the decision- making and the closure of parliaments in numerous Member States during the pandemic, which has increased the power of governments and has led to a lack of accountability and transparency;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is deeply concerned about the status of Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal, the close connection between prosecutors and the government (in particular the Public Prosecutor General/Minister of Justice) and the complete disregard for not only EU law requirements, but also European Convention on Human Rights and Polish Constitutional requirements2 ; is further concerned about the impartiality of the judiciary in Hungary3 and the iandependence of the judiciary in signs of weakening of the rule of law in Slovakia, Malta, Slovenia, Bulgaria and Spain4 ; _________________ 2 Petitions No 0559/2020, 1154/2020, 1246/2020, 1360/2020 and 0869/2021. 3 Petition No 1512/2020. 4 Petitions No 1180/2020, 1182/2020, 1326/2020, 1367/2020, 1561/2020 and 0353/2021.
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on the common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities (Article 2 TEU values) and in the Copenhagen Criteria – values that are common to the EU Member States and to which candidate countries must adhere in order to join the Union and they cannot just be disregarded or reinterpreted after accession; whereas democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights are mutually reinforcing values which, when undermined, may pose a systemic threat to the Union;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the indispensability of enforcing court sentences, both at national and EU level; condemns all national and regional governments on EU territory that refuse to follow judgments; emphasises that sentences of the Court of Justice of the European Union have to be implemented in a timely manner and as soon as possible in accordance with the Treaties, which the Member States agreed to comply with5 , in particular, those court sentences that seek to prevent discrimination on grounds of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic characteristics, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation; _________________ 5 Petition No 0858/2017.
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the principle of sincere cooperation in Article 4 (3) TEU provides for an obligation of Member States to actively seek compliance with the EU Treaties, to facilitate the achievement of Union tasks and to obtain from any contravening measures;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Regrets the fact that that the safety of journalists is not universally guaranteed; underlines the importance of media pluralism and the need to protect journalists against threats and attacks in order to prevent self-censorship and to assure freedom of expression and the right to information and safeguard the journalistic profession; calls on the Commission to improve the instruments for assessing measures taken by governments that may undermine freedom of information and pluralism;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas without meaningful recommendations and effective follow- up, the rule of law report may fail to prevent, detect and effectively address systemic challenges and backsliding on the rule of law, as witnessed in several EU Member States in recent years;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Draws attention to the need for better regulation and more transparency regarding social networking sitemedia platforms9 ; takes note of the insufficiency of the horizontal assessment of the media sector and the lack of representation of online media in the Commission’s 2021 Rule of Law report (COM(2121)700); _________________ 9 Petitions No 1336/2020, 0036/2021, 0137/2021, 0691/2021 and 0719/2021.
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Observes that fake news and the resulting misinformation aimed at EU citizens are a threat to our EU democracies10 ; notes, however, that overly extensive control of false information and the increased promotion of disinformation campaigns may lead, which must be combated with guarantees and without giving rise to any violation of Article 11(1) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights which guarantees the right to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authorities and regardless of borders11 ; _________________ 10 Petitions No 1310/2019, 0268/2020, 0743/2020 and 1293/2020. 11 Petition No 1336/2020.
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas it is necessary to strengthen and streamline existing mechanisms and to develop an effective EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights to ensure that Article 2 TEU values are upheld throughout the Union and prevent Member States from using the application of their domestic law to violate those values;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Is concerned about the increase in hate crimes against minorities, in particular those related to religious beliefs, political ideas and sexual orientation12 ; is aware of the difficult balance between hate speech and freedom of expression and acknowledges that the boundaries are hard to define; calls on the Commission to continue its work to establish effective criteria against this problem, and to do so without affecting the pluralism of the system; _________________ 12 Petitions No 0354/2020, 0657/2020, 1038/2020, 0471/2021, 0480/2021, 0667/2021, 0704/2021, 0725/2021, 0820/2021, 0855/2021 and 0894/2021.
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Underlines that the role of civil society organisations is of particular importance; calls on the Commission to foster debatesopen, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and with civil society organisations in order to take note of all their concerns and involve them more effectively in follow-up meetings; highlights the need to offer longer consultation periods to guarantee proper participation of all civil society organisations; urges the Commission, therefore, to step up and structure its monitoring of the situation of civic space in the Member States by creating a ‘European civic space index’ based on existing frameworks for measuring civic space, and by dedicating to civic space a fully-fledged chapter including country recommendations in its annual rule of law report.
Amendment 104 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Amendment 107 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Points out that on the 16 of February the Court of Justice of the European Union will release its judgement on the compliance of the conditionality requirement with the Treaty following the complaint filed by Poland and Hungary;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Welcomes the judgements of the European Court of Justice of 16th of February 2022 and its conclusions that the EU indeed has competences regarding the Rule of Law in the Member States, that Rule of Law conditionality mechanism is in line with EU law, and that the actions brought by Hungary and Poland against the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation should be dismissed;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that the functioning of justice systems, the anti- corruption framework, media pluralism and certain institutional issues related to checks and balances, including civic space to a certain extent, are all part of the Commission’s annual report; regrets, however, that not all rule of law issues were covered in sufficient detail in the 2021 report; calls for the inclusion in the annual report of other important elements of the Venice Commission’s 2016 Rule of Law Checklist, such as the fight against impunity, judicial accountability, independence of prosecutors and judges, enforcement of sentences, and also others from the Venice Commission’s 2016 Rule of Law Checklist; also calls for an examination of Member States' violations or when Member States fail to act on violations carried out by sub-state entities; believes that civic space deserves a separate subheading in the report;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that the functioning of justice systems, the anti- corruption framework, media pluralism and certain institutional issues related to checks and balances, including civic space to a certain extent, are all part of the Commission’s annual report; regrets, however, that not all rule of law issues were covered in sufficient detail in the 2021 report; calls for the inclusion in the annual report of other important elements of the Venice Commission’s 2016 Rule of Law Checklist; believes that civic spacesituation of the civic space in the Member States deserves a separate subheadingchapter in the report; and deserves the creation of a ‘European civic space index’;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with satisfaction that the report contains country-specific chapters; commends the Commission’s efforts to engage with national governments and national parliaments, as well as civil society and other national actors; encourages the Commission to devote greater efforts to deepening the analysis, and invites the Commission to ensure proper resources for that; believes that more time and importance should be devotedgiven to the Commission’s country visits, including on siteespecially on site; calls on the Commission to raise greater awareness of these visits among the public in order to foster a rule of law culture at national level; furthermore it calls on the Commission to organise communication campaigns about the importance of respecting the Rule of Law;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Is of the opinion that the Rule of Law report is currently a descriptive documentation of the situation in the Member States; stresses that a thorough analysis of the state of play in the Member States require an analysis and an overall evaluation of the Rule of Law in the Member States; calls on the Commission therefore to develop a Rule of Law index based on an objective and non- discriminative point system, which as a ‘traffic light’ assessment could signal the level of the rule of law in the Member States;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets the fact that the report fails to clearly recognise the deliberate process of the rule of law backsliding in Poland and Hungary; calls on the Commission to make clear that when the Article 2 TEU values are being deliberately, gravely, permanently and systematically violated over a period of time, Member States could fail to fulfilmeet all the criteria that define a democracy and become authoritarian or illiberal regimes;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets the fact that several Member States, in particular Hungary and Poland, had to be mentioned several times by the Commission as points of concern in the synthesis report; recalls that since June 2021 Parliament has also addressed the rule of law situation in Hungary, Poland and Slovenia in its plenary resolutions; further recalls that Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs’ Democracy, Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights Monitoring Group has also addressed similar issueproblems in Bulgaria, Greece, Malta, Slovakia and, Slovenia and Spain;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Is strongly of the opinion that the Rule of Law cycle can be effective only if the principle of sincere cooperation set out in Art. 4 (3) TEU is equally respected and applied by the European institutions and the Member States;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the annual report should identify cross-cutting trends at EU level; asks the Commission to identify instances where certain measures or practices that undermine the rule of law in one Member State become blueprints for others, or when the gravity and scope of such deficiencies have the potential to affect the Union as a whole; calls therefore for an assessment of whether offences against the constitutional order, to which such practices and measures may give rise, should be included in the Union's list of serious crimes, given that they have a cross-border dimension or need to be combated on a common basis;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. UnderlinStresses witsh concern at the fact that women and people in vulnerable situations, including persons with disabilities, children, religious minorities, particularly at a time of that discriminatory practices continue to occur, based on grounds such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social orisging antisemitism and anti-Muslim hatred in Europe, Romani people, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or andy other persons belonging to ethnic and linguistic minorities, migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, LGBTI+ persons and elderly people, continue to see their rights not being fully respected across the Unopinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation; emphasises the obvious link between deteriorating rule of law standards and violations of fundamental rights and minority rights;
Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the time limits for consultation with civil society is often too short and should be suitably adapted and flexible in order to allow for complete and comprehensive input; points out that this has made it more difficult for stakeholders to prepare and plan their contributions and awareness-raising activities, in particular if the consultation coincides with winter holidays; calls on the Commission to allow multilingual submissionsubmissions in the official EU languages; notes that consultation can be improved by ensuring follow-up with civil society actors on the input they provide;
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the time limits for consultation with civil society is often too short or ill-timed and should be suitably adapted and flexible in order to allow for complete and comprehensive input; points out that this has made it more difficult for stakeholders to prepare and plan their contributions and awareness-raising activities, in particular if the consultation coincides with winter holiday due to the limits of their capacities and their financial resources; calls on the Commission to allow multilingual submissions; notes that consultation can be improved by ensuring follow-up with civil society actors on the input they provide;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that the Commission must take into account relevant information from pertinent sources and recognised institutions; recalls that the findings of relevant international bodies, such as those under the auspices of the UN, the OSCE and the Council of Europe, are of crucial importance; believes that EFRIS is a useful source of information in this regardshould be taken into account;
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to invite the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) to provide methodological advice and conduct comparative research to add detail in key areas of the annual report, bearing in mind that the right to a fair trial, the fight against impunity, the freedom of expression and other fundamental rights have intrinsic links with the rule of law;
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses the indispensability of enforcing court sentences, both at national and EU level; condemns all national governments and sub-state entities on EU territory that refuse to follow judgments; emphasises that sentences of the Court of Justice of the European Union have to be implemented in a timely manner and as soon as possible in accordance with the Treaties, which the Member States agreed to comply with, in particular, those court sentences that seek to prevent discrimination on grounds of sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic characteristics, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Reiterates that the annual report should serve as a basis for deciding whether to activate one or several relevant tools such as Article 7 TEU, the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation, the Rule of Law Framework or infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, applications for interim measures before the CJEU and actions regarding non-implementation of CJEU judgments; calls on the institutions to activate such tools without delay; reiterates its call on the Commission to create a direct link between the Annual Rule of Law reports and the Rule of Law Conditionality mechanism;
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recalls that infringement procedures are the core instrument to protect and defend EU law and the common values enshrined in Article 2 TEU; notes with concern that the number of infringement procedures launched by the Commission has plummeted since 2004; is surprised by the fact that infringement procedures are not triggered systematically as soon as the relevant infringement is documented in the annual report; deplores the Commission’s reluctance to actively and systematically monitor the implementation of EU law and to exhaust the possibilities of infringement procedures against Member States as the instrument most tailored to resolve the issues efficiently and without delay; notes that this reluctance resulted in calls on Member States to initiate inter-State cases in accordance with Article 259 TFEU; is concerned that without systematic and timely application the preventive capacity of infringement procedures declines;