Activities of Kostadinka KUNEVA related to 2018/2111(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on implementation of the Treaty provisions related to EU citizenship
Amendments (19)
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has been contributing to the progressive development of the notion of citizenship to the point where certain aspects have been gaining a relative autonomy through the lens of the European constitutional setting; recalls that article 20 TFEU precludes national measures that have the effect of depriving citizens of the Union of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of the rights conferred by virtue of their status as citizens of the Union1b; _________________ 1b Judgement of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 9 March 2011, Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v. Office national de l'emploi (ONEm), European Court Reports 2011 I- 01177.
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Strongly supports the view citizenship has been developed as a fundamental status for nationals of the Member States without any discrimination whatsoever, that is enjoyed even in the absence of a cross-border element and can be therefore permissibly invoked against measures that have a restrictive or deprivatory nature 1c; conversely believes that individuals that fulfil the criteria for naturalisation under national laws should not be prevented from enjoying the rights emanating from the European citizenship due to administrative delays in the process of evaluation; recommends therefore for States to make publicly available the conditions and requirements in an accessible and understandable manners; _________________ 1c Judgement of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 March 2010, Janko Rottman v. Reistaat Bayern, Case C- 135/08.
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Strongly believes that the principle of non-discrimination is a cornerstone of the European citizenship and a general principle and a fundamental value of the EU Law according to Article 2 of the TEU; Stresses in particular that Article 10 of the TFEU prohibits discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation when defining and implementing policies and activities; Reminds that the Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC) which introduced prohibition of discrimination on the basis of race or ethnicity in the context of employment, the Gender Goods and Services Directive (2004/113/EC) and Gender Equality Directive (2006/54/EC) guarantees equal treatment only in relating to social security; regrets the fact that the Directives still are lacking in implementation more than ten years after the deadline for their transposition;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Regrets the fact that the Anti- discrimination Directive implementing the principle of equal treatment outside the labour market, extending protection against discrimination with a horizontal approach still remains blocked by the Council, a decade after the Commission proposal; believes that the upcoming presidencies should strive to deliver a position on the Directive by the end of the mandate;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Reminds that the EU Charter of Fundamental reserves the following rights for the European citizens in Chapter 5 : the right to vote and to stand as a candidate at elections to the European Parliament, right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal elections, right to good administration, right to access to documents, the European Ombudsman, right to petition, freedom of movement and of residence, diplomatic and consular protection in third states;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Strongly believes that the citizenship, should not merely reflect a series of economic freedoms and this perception can be tackled only by raising the social dimension of citizenship by materializing the European Pillar of Social Rights by legislative proposals;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls for gender mainstreaming and a gender perspective in all evaluation and assessment processes of current legislative texts and proposals in the future relating to citizenship;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Recalls the contribution of political parties at European level to "forming European political awareness and to expressing the will of the citizens of the Union" (Art.10.4 TEU); calls therefore for the possibility of individual citizens of the EU to directly apply for membership in political parties at European level;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers the exercise, pursuant to Article 22(1) TFEU, by Union citizens of electoral rights at municipal level to be a crucial corollary to the right to free movement and Union citizenship, and holds that participatory democracy at EU level would be rendered more effective were citizens first convinced of the effectiveness of political involvement inat a local communitieslevel with a European perspective; urges the Commission, in that regard, to further best practices in promoting higher voter turnout in municipal and local elections across the Union for citizens of the Union residing in an EU Country pursuant to the Directive 94/80/EC; Further considers that the Directive should be updated providing for a further harmonization and diminishing of administrative burdens for European citizens;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Strongly believes transparency is an essential ingredient of the rule of law, while ensuring that it is observed throughout the legislative process affects the effective materialization of the right to vote and the right to stand in elections and a handful of rights, i.e. right of expressions and its particular aspect the freedom of speech and the right to receive information; Considers also that forging an active European citizenship necessitates margin for public scrutiny, review and evaluation of the process and the prospect to challenge the outcome; Underlines that this would contribute to the gradual familiarization with basic concepts of the legislative process and foster the participatory elements of the democratic life of the Union;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Reminds that the principles of publicity, openness and transparency are inherent to the EU Legislative process, in order to allow citizens to find out the considerations underpinning legislative actions and therefore ensures effective exercise of their democratic rights 1a; _________________ 1a Joined Cases C-39/05 and C-52/05 P, Kingdom of Sweden and Maurizio Turco v. Council of the European Union, European Court Reports 2008 I-04723
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Recalls that the exercise of the right of petition has been granted to any European Union resident and to any legal person having its registered office in a Member State, regardless of citizenship or nationality;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Reminds that the petition is a way for citizens of the European union the application of EU Law a posteriori as well as a valuable source of information for detecting breaches of EU law, particularly in the areas of the environment, the internal market, in areas relating to the recognition of professional qualifications, the financial services sector and especially regarding the infringement of fundamental rights and might lead to the initiation of infringement proceedings by the European Commission;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 e (new)
Paragraph 3 e (new)
3e. Strongly believes that the latest revision of the European Electoral Law, is a missed opportunity to truly harmonize the Member States electoral law and reinvigorate the European acquis by innovative changes to increase democratic legitimacy and integrity of the decision making process.
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)
Paragraph 3 f (new)
3f. Highlights the importance of the right to lodge a complaint with the Ombudsperson on issues relating to the access to information, administrative delays, unfairness, discrimination or lack of transparency; Appreciates the contribution of the incumbent Ombudswoman in shedding light on issues of maladministration and insufficient transparency in the European institutions; strongly believes that the role of the European Ombudsperson should be upgraded in order to facilitate greater preparedness and effective response, as well as active contribution to the solution;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Reiterates that the right to petition should be further promoted as a channel for communication between the citizens and the European institutions; stresses out that the right to petition is an instrument for direct participation in the political functions exercises by the representatives of the peoples of the European Union; furthermore highlights that the right is a key tool for participation and democratic control by citizens and enhances the responsiveness of the European Parliament towards the citizens and residents of the European Union, while at the same time provides individuals with an open, democratic and transparent mechanism for obtaining a non-judicial remedy for their complaints which as such ought to offer solutions to issues admissibly presented before the institutions;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the revision of the legal framework governing the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) presentsed an opportunity to enhance citizen participation in EU policy making by rendering the instrument less bureaucratic and more accessible; calls on the Commission to develop more robust practices as regards the political and legal follow-up given to ECIs; Regrets that the role of the European Parliament, as the voice of the European peoples was not enhanced in the revision process vis-à-vis the follow-up of an initiative.
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that the SOLVIT service should be further mainstreamed and supplemented to become more efficient with issues related to free movement rights, including the right to entry and residence and discrimination before seeking any judicial or administrative remedy, saving time and recourses of the citizens and timely responding to their problems'
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Considers that despite the efforts of the European institutions, awareness raising about rights is still lacking in many member states, proving to be the most prominent barrier to the full enjoyment of the rights emanating from the status of the European citizen;