19 Amendments of Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA related to 2022/2051(INL)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Supports the proposals made by the plenary of the Conference on the Future of Europe (‘the Conference’) of 9 May 2022 in relation to the field of civil liberties, justice and home affairs1 ; reiterates its support for a proper follow-up to the Conference, with the aim of delivering on the Conference’s conclusions and on citizens’ expectations; calls upon the Union to more systematically uphold the rule of law principles and ensure fundamental rights protection, and to scrutinize respect for these values and principles, both in the accession of new members and continually across all Union policies and across the Member States; _________________ 1 In particular the following proposals: 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the original idea behindconclusion of the Conference on the Future of Europe as regards citizens’ information and participation in democracy at Union level, aiming at making the Union more understandable and accessibla watershed moment for European democracy and a precedent for citizens’ participation in the Union's decision- making process for the years to come;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses that citizens have identified at the Conference that the technological revolution and geopolitical upheaval pose new transnational challenges which are to be addressed; points out that for citizens to understand the added value of the Union, the European institutions need to be empowered to act more effectively;
Amendment 5 #
1 b. Recalls the joint commitment by the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission to listen to Europeans and to follow up on the recommendations made by the Conference on the Future of Europe;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that manysome of the proposals endorsadopted by the Conference on the Future of Europe do not require Treaty change but instead call for the strengthening of existing policies and instruments; takes the view that the division of competences provided for in the Treaties, and in particular Articles 4 and 5 Tstresses that others can only be implemented through a substantial amendment of the Treaties, inter alia, concerning the simplification of the institutional architecture of the Union, more transparency and accountability in the decision-making process and a new reflection on Union competences, such as health and healthcare, defence, education, application of fundamental rights and citizenship; takes the view that these proposals together indicate a clear demand and mandate for an urgent and deep reform of the Union’s architecture and decision-making procedures; underlines that this reform necessarily includes a substantial amendment of the Treaties per Article 48 TFEU,; should remain unchangedtates that many of the petitions sent to the Parliament address situations that could be improved if those changes were made;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Calls on the Commission to include in its set of concrete actions to deliver on the Conference proposals the consolidation of a European Citizenship Statute providing citizen-specific rights and freedoms, which would make the European values and rights more tangible for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. CPoints out that the adoption of legislative proposals in the area of freedom, security and justice has been slow or even blocked, despite the urgent need for action; calls for the abolishment of all unanimity requirements in the Treaties for adopting legislation in these area of freedom, security and justices, including for the use of passerelle clauses; calls for the Commission to prepare a report examining the cost of non-action at European level in these areas;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the right to petition is a citizen’s right which should plays a fundamental role as a direct participatory democracy tool in the Union’s decision- making; recalls that petitions can be used as means of creating opportunities for public debate and of initiating and evaluating policy and legislative changes; calls on the Member States and the Commission to do their utmost toall actors involved in the Treaty reform procedure to seize the occasion to strengthen citizens' participation in the Union's decision-making as well as the right to petition, inter alia by ensureing that petitions are given adequately followed up by the Union institutions; stresses that citizens themselves should have a substantial say in said Treaty reform procedure;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. NoteRegrets that the right to petition remains underused at Union level when compared with the situation, as underpinned by Articles 10 and 11 TEU and Articles 24 and 227 TEU, remains underused at Unational level; recalls, also, that about a quarter of the petitions submitted to the European Parliament are declared inadmissible, mainly because the matter falls outside the Union’s fields of activity, which points out the lack of understanding, among Union citizens, of the Union’s remit of competen; therefore calls to assess the division of competences set forth in the Treaties and more clearly define the Union’s remit so that the right to petition can be more effectively implemented in practice;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes the Commission’s lack of initiative or effective action to address violations or non-application of Union law in the areas of freedom, security and justice, despite evidence of deteriorating situations in several Member States; notes that Parliament’s repeated calls for action have gone unanswered; therefore, considers it necessary to strengthen the Parliament’s means of scrutinising the Commission’s activities regarding the monitoring and enforcement of Union law;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes with concern the prevailing number of petitions on environmental matters reflecting citizen’s clear demands towards the Union as confirmed by the outcomes of the Conference on the Future of Europe; calls therefore for strengthening the weight of the environmental Chapter of the TFEU and for the enforcement and monitoring of the Union environmental legislation implementation taking into account citizen’s demands along with Union priorities in tackling climate and biodiversity crises, enhancing the quality, protection and restoration of the ecosystems and zero waste goals;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the Treaties currently do not contain a legal basis to introduce legislation to defend the common values expressed in Article 2 TEU and that this absence has seriously limited the Union in creating suitable mechanisms to redress national threats to the common values; considers it essential for the protection of all Europeans that the Union has the ability to address effectively any democratic backsliding in the Member States; calls for the inclusion of such a provision, which would allow the Union, through the ordinary legislative procedure, to introduce new mechanisms for the structural monitoring and assessment of the developments as regards the common values in each Member State, including annual reports on the situation as regards the Article 2 TEU values in each of the Member States, and to issue country- specific recommendations and impose measures in case of lack of remedial action;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Calls for a European Citizenship Statute to be drawn-up, providing citizen- specific rights and freedoms, which would make the European values and rights more tangible for citizens of the Union;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Regrets that the Charter of Fundamental Rights only deploys its protection when rights are violated in application of EU law; states that this restriction leads to situations of impunity and places the most vulnerable sectors of the population, such as minors, in a situation of greater vulnerability; recalls that European citizens and the institutions have spoken out at the Conference on the Future of Europe and expressed their willingness to lift this restriction in order to make the Charter universally applicable, under certain conditions, to prevent national authorities from undermining the democratic principles and values enshrined in the Treaties
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. CRecalls that the expectations of citizens go beyond the strict implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and that the objective should be to render fundamental rights as effective as possible; calls for a widening of the scope of application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in relation to the Member States; to that effect, Article 51(1) Charter could be revised so as to state that EU fundamental rights should protect Union citizens whenever Member States act within the scope of a Union competence, whether exclusive or shared, even if such a competence has not yet been exercised by the Union;5 _________________ 5 In light of AG Sharpston’s opinion of 30 September 2010 in Case C-34/09, Zambrano.
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Points out that EU Citizenship is granted on the basis of nationality of a Member State, which restricts access for a considerable amount of Europeans, in particular stateless persons with EU long- term residency status; calls for a revision of Article 20(1) with a view to extending EU Citizenship rights to stateless persons with EU long-term residency status and ensuring greater equality amongst Europeans;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Notes that mobile Union voters do not enjoy full political rights in their host Member States, which is contrary to European democratic values; recommends extending the right of mobile Union voters to vote under the same conditions as nationals to regional elections in their host Member State; further recommends extending the right of mobile Union voters to vote to national elections in their host Member States, in particular for such voters that are deprived of their right to vote in national elections in the home Member State;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that horizontal EU legislation on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation has still not been adopted since the 2008 Commission initiative due to the absence of unanimity in Council; recommends thereforetherefore considers it necessary that EU action to combat discriminations on the basis of Article 19 TFEU be taken in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure;