Activities of Joachim Stanisław BRUDZIŃSKI
Plenary speeches (7)
The need for the EU's continuous support for Ukraine (debate)
Statement by the candidate for President of the Commission (debate)
The devastating floods in Central and Eastern Europe, the loss of lives and the EU’s preparedness to act on such disasters exacerbated by climate change (debate)
Organised crime, a major threat to the internal security of the European Union and European citizens (topical debate)
Presentation of the programme of activities of the Hungarian Presidency (debate)
The rise of religious intolerance in Europe (debate)
Managing migration in an effective and holistic way through fostering returns (debate)
Institutional motions (19)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the devastating floods in central and eastern Europe, the loss of lives and the EU’s preparedness to act on such disasters exacerbated by climate change
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the devastating floods in central and eastern Europe, the loss of lives and the EU’s preparedness to act on such disasters exacerbated by climate change
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the severe situation of political prisoners in Belarus
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the deteriorating situation of women in Afghanistan due to the recent adoption of the law on the “Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice”
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the situation in Venezuela
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the case of José Daniel Ferrer García in Cuba
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on strengthening Moldova’s resilience against Russian interference ahead of the upcoming presidential elections
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the democratic backsliding and threats to political pluralism in Georgia
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION The case of unjustly imprisoned Uyghurs in China, notably Ilham Tohti and Gulshan Abbas
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION the case of Bülent Mumay in Türkiye
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION Iraq, notably the situation of women’s rights and recent proposal to amend the Personal Status Law
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on strengthening Moldova’s resilience against Russian interference ahead of the upcoming presidential elections and a constitutional referendum on EU integration
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the democratic backsliding and threats to political pluralism in Georgia
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the cases of unjustly imprisoned Uyghurs in China, notably Ilham Tohti and Gulshan Abbas
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on Iraq, notably the situation of women’s rights and the recent proposal to amend the Personal Status Law
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on People’s Republic of China’s misinterpretation of the UN resolution 2758 and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the misinterpretation of UN resolution 2758 by the People’s Republic of China and its continuous military provocations around Taiwan
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on EU actions against the Russian shadow fleets and ensuring a full enforcement of sanctions against Russia
JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on EU actions against the Russian shadow fleets and ensuring a full enforcement of sanctions against Russia
Written explanations (7)
Establishing the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism and providing exceptional macro-financial assistance to Ukraine
Głosowałem za przyjęciem sprawozdania pod tytułem „Utworzenie Mechanizmu współpracy pożyczkowej dla Ukrainy i udzielenie Ukrainie wyjątkowej pomocy makrofinansowej”. Uważam, że mechanizm finansowy bardzo wspomoże Ukrainę pod względem odbudowy krytycznej infrastruktury oraz umożliwi temu krajowi przetrwanie nadchodzącej zimy. Według najnowszych informacji, Korea Północna wysłała do Rosji swoich żołnierzy, którzy mają wspomóc rosyjską armię w wojnie przeciwko Ukrainie. Istotne jest, żebyśmy również i my wsparli naród ukraiński w tym trudnym okresie. Dodatkowo, utworzony mechanizm oznacza że strona rosyjska poniesie finansowe koszty swojej dotychczasowej napaści na Ukrainę.
Draft amending budget No 2/2024: entering the surplus of the financial year 2023
W niniejszym głosowaniu poparłem projekt budżetu korygującego do budżetu ogólnego na 2024 rok, który zakłada przeniesienie nadwyżki z poprzedniego roku budżetowego na bieżący. Procedura budżetowa umożliwia efektywne zarządzanie niewykorzystanymi środkami, co pozwala na ich zwrot państwom członkowskim poprzez zmniejszenie ich składek. Tego rodzaju rozwiązanie sprzyja odpowiedzialności finansowej i stanowi krok w stronę bardziej przejrzystego zarządzania środkami Unii. Uważam, że taki mechanizm daje państwom członkowskim większą elastyczność w dysponowaniu środkami, umożliwiając przeznaczenie zaoszczędzonych funduszy na realizację ich lokalnych priorytetów. Zwrot niewykorzystanych zasobów finansowych wzmacnia też ich odpowiedzialność budżetową na szczeblu krajowym, co przekłada się na korzyści dla całej Wspólnoty. Popierając ten projekt, wyrażam przekonanie, że efektywne gospodarowanie środkami budżetowymi Unii powinno opierać się na zasadach przejrzystości i odpowiedzialności, co pozwala na pełniejsze zaspokajanie potrzeb wszystkich obywateli Unii Europejskiej.
Draft amending budget 4/2024: update of revenue (own resources) and adjustments to some decentralised agencies
W przedmiotowym głosowaniu wyraziłem poparcie dla projektu budżetu korygującego, dostrzegając w nim istotne kroki w stronę zwiększenia elastyczności i efektywności finansowej Unii Europejskiej. Aktualizacje dochodów oraz dostosowania dotyczące kluczowych agencji, odpowiadają na zmieniające się potrzeby wspólnoty, co uważam za ważne dla zapewnienia stabilności i skutecznego funkcjonowania unijnych struktur. Projekt uwzględnia aktualne prognozy finansowe oraz wprowadza rozsądne korekty w odniesieniu do wsparcia instytucji, których działalność jest kluczowa dla realizacji priorytetów UE, szczególnie w zakresie bezpieczeństwa, zdrowia publicznego oraz współpracy transgranicznej. Należy zaznaczyć, iż odpowiednie podejście do planowania budżetowego, pozwala na optymalne zarządzanie zasobami, uwzględniając aktualne wyzwania i priorytety. Wspomniany budżet korygujący stanowi w mojej ocenie wyważone rozwiązanie, które pozwala na skuteczne reagowanie na bieżące potrzeby Unii Europejskiej, dbając przy tym o równowagę finansową i odpowiedzialność budżetową.
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: application EGF/2024/001 BE/Match-Smatch
Wniosek dotyczy 69 zwolnionych pracowników, którzy zaprzestali działalności przed czteromiesięcznym okresem odniesienia lub po nim. Dokument opiera się na kryterium interwencji przewidzianym w rozporządzeniu w sprawie EFG, zgodnie z którym wymagane jest zaprzestanie działalności co najmniej 200 zwalnianych pracowników. Trzeba zauważyć, że w belgijskim sektorze handlu detalicznego żywnością odnotowano znaczny spadek wielkości sprzedaży w 2023 r. ze względu na kryzys energetyczny i inflacyjny oraz zwiększenie zakupów transgranicznych i handlu elektronicznego. Opowiedziałem się za przyjęciem wniosku EFG gdyż sytuacja gospodarcza Match-Smatch od kilku lat była trudna i ostatecznie przedsiębiorstwo, którego dotyczy sprawa zgłosiło stratę operacyjną brutto w wysokości 36,5 mln EUR w 2022 r. i aby zapobiec dalszym stratom, we wrześniu 2023 r. przedsiębiorstwo Match-Smatch przyjęło ofertę Grupy Colruyt dotyczącą nabycia 57 z 84 sklepów, co wiązało się także z przejęciem personelu sklepów. W rezultacie wobec łącznie 513 pracowników zastosowano procedurę zwolnień grupowych. Trzeba było wprowadzić rozwiązania wspomagające gdyż kryzys gospodarczy spowodowany pandemią COVID-19 przyspieszył popyt na bardziej wykwalifikowanych pracowników na belgijskim rynku pracy, co utrudniło powrót na rynek pracy byłym pracownikom Match-Smatch.
Discharge 2022: EU general budget – European Council and Council
Wstrzymałem się od głosowania za drugim sprawozdaniem w sprawie absolutorium za rok 2022 dot. budżetu ogólnego UE – Rady Europejskiej i Rady. Moje wstrzymanie się od głosowania wynika z faktu, iż w sprawozdaniu zarzucono stosowanie procedury jednomyślności w Radzie w niektórych obszarach polityki, które paraliżują unijny proces decyzyjny. Dodatkowo, uwagi oraz wnioski w sprawozdaniu z kwietnia pozostają nadal aktualne. Konkretnie uwagi w kwestiach zarządzania budżetem i finansami, zarządzania wewnętrznego i kontroli wewnętrznej oraz zasobów ludzkich nie zostały poprawione, co wpłynęło na moją finalną decyzję o wstrzymaniu się od głosowania.
General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2025 – all sections
Podjąłem decyzję, aby zagłosować za sprawozdaniem pod tytułem „Budżet ogólny Unii Europejskiej na rok budżetowy 2025 – wszystkie sekcje”. Istotnym powodem poparcia tego sprawozdania przeze mnie jest wsparcie inwestycyjne, które ma być przeznaczone na nowych i młodych rolników w Unii Europejskiej. Inwestowanie w wymianę pokoleniową jest znaczące dla kontynuacji i rozwoju sektora rolniczego, dlatego uznałem, że wsparcie finansowe dla rolników posiadających małe oraz średnie gospodarstwa rolne jest dobrym i istotnym krokiem. Dodatkowo, zwiększenie środków na Unijny Mechanizm Ochrony Ludności i ochronę zewnętrznych granic UE, zwłaszcza granic sąsiadujących z Rosją i państwami frontowymi, wspomoże takie kraje jak Polska, która jest ofiarą ataków hybrydowych ze strony Białorusi.
Guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States
Parlament Europejski z zadowoleniem przyjął wniosek Komisji w sprawie zaktualizowanych wytycznych dotyczących zatrudnienia dla państw członkowskich. Cieszy również fakt, że położono w nim silny nacisk na kształcenie i szkolenie, a także na nowe technologie, sztuczną inteligencję i zarządzanie algorytmiczne. W celu wzmocnienia demokratycznego procesu decyzyjnego Parlament Europejski ponawia apel o to, by uczestniczył na równi z Radą w ustalaniu zintegrowanych wytycznych na poziomie Unii, zgodnie ze swoimi rezolucjami ustawodawczymi z 8 lipca 2015 r., 19 kwietnia 2018 r., 10 lipca 2020 r. i 18 października 2022 r. w sprawie wniosku dotyczącego decyzji Rady w sprawie wytycznych dotyczących polityki zatrudnienia państw członkowskich. Będzie nam się wówczas lepiej współpracowało. Niestety zmuszony jestem zagłosować przeciw temu, że pod pretekstem polepszenia funkcjonowania pracowników przemyca się idee, na które nie mogę się zgodzić. Nie mogę przystać na dokumenty, które promują wizję przedstawiająca nieprawdziwe informacje, np. o istnieniu więcej niż dwóch płci.
Major interpellations (1)
EU funding of physical border protection structures such as walls, fences or other barriers at the external border
Written questions (1)
EU funding of physical border protection structures such as walls, fences or other barriers
Amendments (506)
Amendment 4 #
2023/2181(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes, additionally, the involvement of the SESAR to respond to the illegal and unjustified Russian aggression against Ukraine since some traffic flows were affected, requiring the reworking of ATC operations of the JU;
Amendment 15 #
2023/2178(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. UnderlineRegrets that the Court considered that the F4E’s senior management situation has remained unstable and in a significant state of transition at the end of 2022 with the departure of the director in June 2022, and the appointment of the head of the Broader Approach Department as ITER-IO Director-General in September 2022, resulting in personnel changes for four of the JU’s seven senior management positions;
Amendment 4 #
2023/2176(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes the EU-Rail's Master Plan and its adjustment to the Plan with the "Rail Strategic Research and Innovation Agenda" of the European Rail Research Advisory Council (ERRAC);
Amendment 1 #
2023/2164(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 1 #
2023/2152(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 2 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 2 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 3 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 3 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 4 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 3
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Acting Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Acting Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 4 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 3
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Acting Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Acting Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 5 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 4
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 5 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 4
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 6 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 5
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 6 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 5
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 7 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 6
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 7 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 6
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 8 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 7
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Research Executive Agency discharge in relation to the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Research Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 8 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 7
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Research Executive Agency discharge in relation to the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Research Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2022;
Amendment 22 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Condemns the lack of transparency from the Commission and pharmaceutical companies in the development, purchase and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 22 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Condemns the lack of transparency from the Commission and pharmaceutical companies in the development, purchase and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 24 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Notes with concern that, to date, the Commission has not make available, not only to the public, but not even to the Members of the European Parliament, the non-redacted versions of the contracts signed with the producers of the COVID- 19 vaccine;
Amendment 24 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Notes with concern that, to date, the Commission has not make available, not only to the public, but not even to the Members of the European Parliament, the non-redacted versions of the contracts signed with the producers of the COVID- 19 vaccine;
Amendment 358 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 – point i d (new)
Paragraph 171 – point i d (new)
(i d) immediately publish the non- redacted versions of the Purhase Agreements for the COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 364 #
2023/2129(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 a (new)
Paragraph 171 a (new)
171 a. be more proactive in publishing documents and statistics regarding how they handle document access requests, as such information would help with assessing the institutions’ proactive approach to document access; calls that an application for access to a document must be handled promptly;
Amendment 1 #
2022/2105(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Institute for Gender Equality discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’s budget for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 2 #
2022/2098(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Asylum Support Office for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Asylum Support Office for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 148 #
2022/2082(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84
Paragraph 84
84. Notes that, in 2021, the overall cost of technical solutions to allow remote voting sessions amounted to EUR 1 275 500, including an extension of the plenary applications (EUR 120 000), the development of the EPvote application (EUR 233 500), IT support to Members (EUR 529 200), to deploy the eVoting system (EUR 250 000) and ad-hoc services to allow Members’ participation from EPLOs (EUR 142 800); points outtakes note of the importance of all of the IT systems that ensure proper remote functioning of the Parliament, points out, however, that all innovations implemented will require an investment for their maintenance in view of future uses;
Amendment 2 #
2022/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Interim Director of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Interim Director of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 3 #
2022/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 3
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 4 #
2022/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 4
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 5 #
2022/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 5
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 6 #
2022/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 6
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Acting Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Acting Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 7 #
2022/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 7
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2021;
Amendment 94 #
2022/2026(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Urges the Commission to improve its monitoring on the use of EU funds, including considering the suspension, withdrawal and recovery of payments if the obligation to respect fundamental rights is breached; stresses that segregational settings and small group homes should not be financed with EU fundsa deinstitutionalisation strategy is not in place or implemented;
Amendment 145 #
2022/2026(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take urgent measures to eliminate the restrictions on legal capacity that hinder the rights of persons with disabilities enshrined in the Treaties, including takpromoting action to replace substituted decision-making with supported decision-making across the EU;
Amendment 151 #
2022/2026(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take adequate measures to eliminate the barriers faced by persons with disabilities in accessing justice, by addressing the lack of awareness about disabilities among criminal justice services, including allocating adequate funding for training to justice personnel and providing specialist support to victims with disabilities;
Amendment 175 #
2022/2026(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the participation of persons with disabilities and their representative organisations in the decision-making process for the design, management, resourcing and implementation of policies and programmes on disaster risk reduction;
Amendment 40 #
2022/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. Whereas due to the lack of a common approach access to information held by the EU institutions is still difficult for citizens
Amendment 74 #
2022/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Believes it is necessary to further develop a more proactive approach to transparency by making as many of documents as possible available to the public in the simplest and easiest way
Amendment 97 #
2022/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Calls on the EU institutions to facilitate access to documents and based on full transparency, communication and direct democracy principle
Amendment 122 #
2022/2015(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. Believes that the EU's institutions should make full use of the potential of new technologies to ensure full and easy access to information
Amendment 103 #
2022/0131(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) This Directive should cover employment relationships between third- country workers and employers. Where a Member State’s national law allows admission of third-country nationals through temporary work agencies established on its territory and which have an employment relationship with the worker, such agencies should not be excluded from the scope of this Directive. This Directive should not cover third- country workers who have been admitted to the territory of a Member State to work on a seasonal basis.
Amendment 126 #
2022/0131(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The right to equal treatment in specified fields should be strictly linked to the third-country national’s legal residence and the access given to the labour market in a Member State, which are enshrined in the single permit encompassing the authorisation to reside and work and in residence permits issued for other purposes containing information on the permission to work. This Directive should not grant rights in relation to situations which lie outside the scope of Union law, such as in relation to family members residing in a third country. This Directive should grant rights only in relation to family members who join third-country workers to reside in a Member State on the basis of family reunification or family members who already reside legally in that Member State.
Amendment 132 #
2022/0131(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) To ensure the proper enforcement of this Directive, Member States should ensure that appropriate mechanisms are in place for the monitoring of employers and that, where appropriate, effective and adequate inspections are carried out on their respective territories. The selection of employers to be inspected should be based primarily on a risk assessment to be carried out by the competent authorities in the Member States taking into account factors such as the sector in which a company operates and any past record of infringement.
Amendment 136 #
2022/0131(COD)
(33) Member States should also put in place effective mechanisms through which third-country workers may seek legal redress and lodge complaints directly or through third parties having, in accordance with the criteria laid down by the national law, a legitimate interest in ensuring compliance with this Directive, such as trade unions or other associations, or competent authorities. That is considered necessary to address situations where third- country workers are unaware of the existence of enforcement mechanisms or hesitant to use them in their own name, for example out of fear of possible consequences. Such mechanisms should respect the principle of equality vis-à-vis the nationals of the respective Member State.
Amendment 152 #
2022/0131(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(g a) who are beneficiaries of protection in accordance with national law, international obligations or the practice of a Member State or have applied for protection in accordance with national law, international obligations or the practice of a Member State and whose application has not been the subject of a final decision;
Amendment 163 #
2022/0131(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. An application to issue, amend or renew a single permit shall be submitted by way of a single application procedure. Member States shall determine whether applications for a single permit are to be submittedmade by the third-country national or by the third-country national’s employer. Member States may also decide to allow an application from either of the two. If the application is to be submitted by the third- country national, Member States shall allow the application to be introduced both from a third country andor, if provided for by national law, in the territory of the Member State in which the third- country national is legally present.
Amendment 170 #
2022/0131(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The competent authority shall adopt a decision on the complete application as soon as possible and in any event within foursix months of the date on which the application was lodged.
Amendment 237 #
2022/0131(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 9 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 27 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission to present in its next reports a chapter on the compliance of the institutions of the European Union with the rule of law, in particular on the situation within the Commission itself. The EU institutions should resolve numerous internal problems, such as: lack of transparency, obstruction of access to documents, the 'revolving door' problem, and corruption;
Amendment 43 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes with concern that the contracts signed by the Commission with pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines have clauses that have not been published in their entirety for over a year;
Amendment 44 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Stresses that NGOs should be obliged to disclose their sources of funding; stresses that all European bodies must disclose and publish a list of all NGOs they fund and the amount of this funding in order to be in compliance with the principle of transparency and the right of EU citizens to information;
Amendment 46 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the Commission’s annual rule of law reports to resolutely fight against systemic corruption and devise effective instruments for preventing, combating and sanctioning corruption and fighting fraud, as well as for regularly monitoring the use of public funds, including recovery and resilience facility funds. The Commission should focus in the coming years on the fight against corruption and organised crime, which have been fuelled by the COVID-19 pandemic. Organised crime groups are currently earning huge amounts of money from the trade in counterfeit medicines, vaccines, other medical equipment and false certificates.
Amendment 101 #
2021/2146(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Recalls that the crisis at the EU- Belarus border caused by the Lukashenka regime's hybrid warfare is being kept under control thanks to FRONTEX;
Amendment 12 #
2021/2143(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 24 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Calls for buildings to be modernised in order to meet zero-emission standards, in particular by installing solar panels on all buildings belonging to the Agency;
Amendment 2 #
2021/2138(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the gender distribution within the Authority’s senior management members, with 3 out of 5 being women (60 %); notes the gender distribution within the Authority’s management board, with 3 out of 6 being of the same gender (50 %); further notes the gender distribution within the Authority’s overall staff, with 134 out of 250 being men (53,60 %); points out, however, that, in the recruitment of new staff and in connection with promotions, the Authority should bear in mind that candidates’ skills, knowledge and experience are the most important factors; points out that the need for a geographical balance among staff members should also be borne in mind;
Amendment 4 #
2021/2138(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Calls for buildings to be modernised in order to meet zero-emission standards, in particular by installing solar panels on all buildings belonging to the Authority;
Amendment 2 #
2021/2122(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Asylum Support Office for the financial year 2020 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Asylum discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Asylum Support Office for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 22 #
2021/2115(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Is aware of the EEAS efforts to achieve a meaningful geographical representation while respecting the competences and merits of candidates and reiterates, in this regard, the necessary provision of additional SNEs to face the EEAS’ increasing workload; urges the EEAS to continue its efforts to improve the geographical representation, as this is a recurring problem, especially in the positions of Heads of Delegation and middle and senior management; observes that at the end of 2020 EEAS staff included nationals from all Member States and welcomes the efforts made by the EEAS to keep the Human Resources Network of Member States informed about the composition of staff, to publish vacancies and to promote national efforts to increase the number of candidates;
Amendment 24 #
2021/2115(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Considers it important to ensure a balanced representation of countries that joined the Union after 2004 or later (EU13) and thus, welcom; notes that the number of staff from these Member States at the end of 2020 had increased by 6 % compared to the previous year; points out that the share of EU13 in the EEAS staff is 23 % at the end of 2020, which is more than the share within the Union population, which corresponds to 20 %;
Amendment 2 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Council and of the Council for the financial year 2020 / Postpones its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Council and of the Council for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 10 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Recalls that key performance indicators are a widely recognized tool for measuring achievement against targets; calls on the Council to provide summaries of its key performance indicators and the related results in its management reports;
Amendment 12 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Regrets the lack of information on the implementation of the Council’s gender action plan and the measures taken to ensure equal opportunities for persons with disabilities at the Council as a workplace; calls on the Council to provide information on gender balance, geographical distribution and disabilities of its members of staff and on the related internal policies in force;
Amendment 14 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 35 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Encourages the Council to maintain control over its own technical systems, provide stronger safeguards for privacy and increase security and transparency for the public;
Amendment 39 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Emphasises Parliament's prerogative to grant discharge pursuant to Article 319 TFEUof the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as well as the applicable provisions of the Financial Regulation and Parliament’s Rules of Procedure; reiterates that this prerogative allows the Union to maintain transparency, democratic scrutiny and in line with current interpretation and practice, namely, the power to grant discharge in order to maintain transparency and to ensure democratic accountability towards Union taxpayers;
Amendment 41 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 42 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Stresses that the current situation, where Parliament can only check the reports of the Court and of the European Ombudsman as well as the information on the Council’s website but does not receive written or oral answers from the Council during the annual discharge procedure, i.e., the Council refuses to collaborate with Parliament in the context of the annual budgetary discharge procedure, makes it impossible for Parliament to make an informed decision on granting discharge, and that this has a lasting negative effect on both institutions and discredits the management and democratic scrutiny of the Union budget; regrets the Council’s continuing refusal to engage in loyal cooperation in the framework of the discharge procedure that has lasted for more than a decade;
Amendment 45 #
2021/2108(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Believes that a revision of the Treaties is necessary to streamlineIn respect of the Council's specific role as an institution giving recommendations on the discharge procedure, making it clearer and more transparent, especially by giving Parliament the explicit competence to grant discharge to all institutions, bodies, offices and agencies individuallyreiterates its requests to the Council to give discharge recommendations with respect to the other Union institutions;
Amendment 49 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38 a. Reminds that the fight against Legionella bacteria is one of the most important tasks in the field of water treatment and disinfection;
Amendment 65 #
2021/2107(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Recalls the support by the vast majority of Parliament for a single seat to ensure efficient spending of Union taxpayers’ money and to assume its institutional responsibility to reduce its carbon footprint; recalls that Parliament’s plenary has previously requested a debate on its right to determine its own working arrangements and committed itself to initiating an ordinary treaty revision procedure under Article 48 of the Treaty on the European Union with a view to proposing changes necessary to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Protocol 6 to allow it to decide on the location of its seat and its internal organisation4 ; calls on the Council to take into account Parliament's position; _________________ 4Report A7-0350/2013 available at https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/A-7-2013-0350_EN.pdf
Amendment 1 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 3 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Director of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 4 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 3
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Director of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 5 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 4
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Director of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 6 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 5
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Director of the European Research Council Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 7 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 6
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Director of the European Research Executive Agency discharge in relation to the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 8 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 7
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Director of the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2020;
Amendment 12 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 14 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates its deep concerns regarding the situation concerning the rule of law in a number of Member States, which is deeply worrying in its own right and may ultimately lead to serious losses for the Union budget and underlines its requests to the Commission to use all available tools to limit the risk of such losses. This should include the immediate and full application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget;
Amendment 106 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40a. Calls on the Commission to stop unjustifiably withholding approval of National Recovery Plans and disbursement of the related funds;
Amendment 197 #
2021/2106(DEC)
90a. Expresses regret that the Commission has imposed on the Member States very ambitious reduction targets for CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions, when most of the buildings managed by the Commission and other EU institutions are not zero-emission; calls, therefore, on the Commission to lead by example and help in the fight against CO2 emissions by installing photovoltaic collectors on all buildings;
Amendment 243 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108 – point k a (new)
Paragraph 108 – point k a (new)
ka. draw up a financial support plan for Ukraine to enable it to recover from the illegal aggression by Vladimir Putin’s regime;
Amendment 257 #
2021/2106(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115
Paragraph 115
115. Welcomes the initiatives taken by the Commission to ensure gender equality and, but recalls the Commission President’s commitment to reach gender equality at all levels of managementat knowledge, merit and experience should bye the end of the current Commission mandate, which is fully supported by Parliamentmain criteria for recruitment and promotion;
Amendment 269 #
2021/2106(DEC)
b. continue its work in order to ensure gender equalitya geographical balance among staff members at all levels of management by the end of the current Commission mandate and to report gender-data disaggregated databy Member State;
Amendment 5 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ReiteratUnderlines that the application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation cannotshould be subject to the adoption of guidelines, and urges the Commission to avoid any further delay in its applic because of the complexity of the subject matter; underlines that until such guidelines are finalised, the Commission should not propose measures under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation;
Amendment 12 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the Commission has begun to draft guidelines on the application of the Regulation; requests that, if the Commission deems such guidelinesit necessary, Parliament be consulted prior to their adoption;
Amendment 20 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that any guidelines must not undermine the adopted regulation or; believes that the guidelines should fully respect the intenrpretation of the co-legislators; asks the Commission to avoid relevant concepts by the Court of Justricte or exhaustive definitions of the concepts, as this woulf the European Union and the General Court and be fin contradiction with the Regulation; considers that interpretation of abstract concepts is a dynamic process which cannot be predefined in one document; believes that the guidelines should fully respect the interpretation of relevant concepts by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Venice Commissionalised after the judgment of the Court of Justice issued in regard to the actions for annulment introduced with regard to the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation, so as to incorporate any relevant elements stemming from such judgment.
Amendment 23 #
2021/2071(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation is to be applied in full respect of Article 4(2) TEU, notably the national identities of Member States inherent in their fundamental political and constitutional structures, of the principle of conferral, as well as of the principles of objectivity, non- discrimination and equal treatment of Member States.
Amendment 2 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9
Citation 9
Amendment 6 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21
Citation 21
Amendment 8 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 29
Citation 29
Amendment 9 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 32
Citation 32
Amendment 10 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 33
Citation 33
Amendment 13 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 34
Citation 34
Amendment 15 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 35
Citation 35
Amendment 16 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 37
Citation 37
Amendment 17 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 39
Citation 39
Amendment 18 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 40
Citation 40
Amendment 19 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 43
Citation 43
Amendment 20 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 44
Citation 44
Amendment 21 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 45
Citation 45
Amendment 23 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on the values set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU); whereas democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights are mutually reinforcing values which, when undermined, may pose a systemic threat to the Union; whereas Article 2 TEU applies not only and not even primarily to the Member States, but to the European Union and the rule of law should cover the EU institutions, all the more so that they have long been accused of democratic deficit;
Amendment 27 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the annual rule of law review cycle is a welcomen addition to the tools available to preserve the Union’s values, by addressing the situation in all EU Member States based on four pillars, with a direct bearing on respect for the rule of lawthe Union; whereas it is intended as a yearly cycle to ensure the rule of law and to prevent problems from emerging or deepening;
Amendment 29 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Commission’s first Rule of Law Report (2020 report) is limitextended in scope, as it does not covercovers more than just rule of law as one of all Union values as provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; whereas the notion of the rule of law has different and distinct manifestations in the Member States and there is no definition of it at the EU level;
Amendment 35 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas while the 2020 report raises concerns and awareness, it does not provide a sufficient assessment of the effectiveness of the reforms carried out by each country, nor any concrete country- specific recommendations, which could jeopardise its intended preventive effectsbecause the Commission has no competences in this regard and the only recommendations regarding the rule of law may be addressed in accordance with procedure set up Article 7(1) TEU;
Amendment 39 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 44 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 58 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the Commission’s first annual Rule of Law Report as part of the wider European rule of law monitoring and enforcement architecture, as it adds an important, potentially preventive tool to the Union’s rule of law toolbox;
Amendment 63 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomNotes the fact that justice systems, the anti-corruption framework, media pluralism and certain institutional issues related to checks and balances, including civic space, are all part of the Commission’s annual overview of the rule of law situation in the Member States; encouragesnotes that the Commission to also highlight positive trends in Member Statehas no competences to determine whether the situation in Member States constitutes positive or negative trends that could serve as good examples for others to follow;
Amendment 72 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses the potential preventive benefits of the annual Rule of Law Report; considers that a more thorough evaluation is needed to assess whether the report has had a preventive effect; considers that in any event this is clearly not the case as regards the Member States under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure; believes that the 2020 report should have provided more in-depth assessments, stating whether there is a risk of or actual breach of the Union values; considers these assessments necessary to identify follow- up actions and remedial measures and tools;
Amendment 78 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 86 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the annual reports shcould identify cross-cutting trends at Union level; believes that a Union-wide perspective is absent from the 2020 report; asks the Commission to identify instances where certain practices undermining the rule of law are becoming blueprints for others or when the gravity and scope of such practices have the potential to affect the Union as a whole;
Amendment 97 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. WelcomNotes the monitoring of the independence, quality and efficiency of the Member States’ justice systems; considers that the enabling environment to ensure access to justice for all should also be monitored, including access to justice at Union level; considers thatorganization and functioning of state bodies, in particular the judiciary is one of the areports should go beyond a static annual snapshot and include information on relevant antecedents in the country chaptersas in which the Member States have not transferred competences to the European Union and despite this, the Commission evaluates them;
Amendment 113 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is alarmed by the stark deterioration of the independence of some Member States’ justice systems, as reflected in some country chapters; calls on the Commission to clearly assess and designate such shortcomings and findings identified as a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule of lawNotes with concern that, apart from the reporting (objective) elements, the report contains evaluative (subjective) elements, without clearly delineating them; rebukes that when assessing similar legal regulations in force in different Member States, the Commission often points to reforms planned in a given area in the Member States, differently assessing solutions designed in some and identical solutions already in use in other Member States;
Amendment 120 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Decries the fact that the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings before the Court of Justice of the EU has been declared unlawful in Member States subject to Article 7 of the TEU; is appalled byCourt of Justice of the EU more and more often goes beyond its Treaty competences and rules ultra vires; supports the growing resistance of some Member States to comply with CJEU rulings on the grounds of sovereignty or unconstitutionality; believes that these developments in the CJEU pose a systemic threat to the existence of the Union; considers, therefore, that forthcoming annual reports should consider challenges from the CJEU's side to the Union’s legal architecture and principles as serious violations in the assessment;
Amendment 136 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. WelcomNotes the dedication of a specific chapter to anti-corruption efforts in each country report; points out that while the existence of national anticorruption strategies can be considered progress, their effectiveness on the ground must also be assessed; notes that an assessment of the resilience of the anti-corruption framework to tackle corruption-related risks in the area of public procurement remains largely absent from the 2020 report; invites the Commission to place greater emphasis on the misuse of EU funds, particularly in view of the new conditionality mechanism;
Amendment 153 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. WelcomNotes the inclusion in the report of a specific chapter on monitoring media freedom and pluralism; urginvites the Commission to provide an assessment of the efficiency and effectiveness of the national frameworks for the protection of media freedom and media pluralism;
Amendment 160 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. DeplorNotes the lack of assessment as regards the public media sector at national level and its degree of independence from government or any other interference and an assessment of transparency of media ownership; believes that proper implementation of Article 30 of the 2018 Audiovisual Media Services Directive19 should be closely monitored; _________________ 19 OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 69.
Amendment 179 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. WelcomNotes the report’s pillar on checks and balances and its examination of exceptional measures taken to fight the COVID-19 pandemic;
Amendment 184 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 196 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 204 #
2021/2025(INI)
16. RegretNotes the fact that the 2020 report fails todoes not encompass fully the Article 2 TEU values of democracy and fundamental rights, which are immediately affected when countries start backsliding onbecause they are not the rule of law;
Amendment 206 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Encourages the Commission to consider including within the scope of future reports the application of all rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights; sStresses that any action taken by a Member State when acting within the scope of EU law must respect the rights and principles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 214 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 228 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. WelcomNotes the Commission’s announcement of its strategy to strengthen the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; believes that such an annual review should provide input for a comprehensive monitoring mechanism and that its methodology, cycle and scope should therefore be aligned with the annual reports;
Amendment 234 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the regular, inclusive and structured dialogue with governments and national parliaments, NGOs, professional associations and other stakeholders; notes that three Member States refused to make public their submissions for the 2020 report; calls for transparency in the process and for all submissions to be made public;
Amendment 242 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Stresses that civil societythe Member States are key partners to identify rule of law violations and promote democracy and fundamental rights in countries where Union values have been eroded; considers that shadow reporting would bolster the efficiency and transparency of the processand therefore should hold a means of wielding influence on the reports’ final content; calls on the Commission to provide that each Member State, after the report has been prepared but before it has been published, have the opportunity to read it and raise objections or comments and the right of final acceptance of that part of the report that relates to themselves and any non- acceptance or dissent, as the case may be, should be indicated directly in the report;
Amendment 249 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Considers that cooperation in the annual monitoring cycle with the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly, includStresses that the annual monitoring cycle should be an EU-only exercise and all sources that are not EU sources should be rejected ing through a more structured partnership, is of particular relevance for advancing democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the EUe selection of inputs to the report, which applies in particular to the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly, of which the EU is not a member so far;
Amendment 254 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 8
Subheading 8
Amendment 256 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 269 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to make mRecognises the leandingful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes that the Council’s hesitance to apply Article 7 of the TEU effectively is enabling continued divergence from the values provided for in Article 2 of the TEU; calls for a reflection at the Conference on the Future of Europe on a revision of the Article 7 TEU procedure in order to realign the majority requirements of paragraphs 1 and 2 with a view to having super-majorities of four or five for both role of the Council in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures;
Amendment 276 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. ReiteratStresses that the annual report should not serve as a basis for deciding whether to activate the procedure provided for in Article 7 of the TEU, whether to activate the Rule of Law Framework or whether to launch infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non-implementation of CJEU judgments concerning the protection of Union values;
Amendment 284 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls for the Commission to useStresses that the findings of the annual report in its assessment that forms the basis of the mechanism to protect the budget against breaches of the principle of the rule of law; reiterates its call on the Commission to dedicate a specific section of the annual report to an analysis of cases where breacheshould not constitute the basis for further assessments, findings or formulation of recommendations concerning individual Member States, made in areas of the principles ofr than the rule of law in a particular Member State could affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget in a sufficiently direct wa, e.g. in the field of economic and fiscal policy;
Amendment 299 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls on the Commission to assessinform in successive reports how the issues identified in the areas analysed in previous reports have evolved;
Amendment 304 #
2021/2025(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 71 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) The lack of adequate information, in the context of electoral procedures, affects citizens in the exercise of their electoral rights as part of their rights as Union citizens. It also affects the capacity of competent authorities to exercise their rights and to deliver on their obligations. Member States should be required to designate authorities with special responsibilities for providing appropriate information to Union citizens on their rights under Article 20(2), point (b), and Article 22(2) TFEU and the national rules and procedures regarding participation in and the organization of elections to the European Parliament. In order to ensure the effectiveness of communications, information should be provided in clearly and comprehensible termsin a timely manner.
Amendment 88 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Amendment 100 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
4. Union voters who have been entered on the electoral roll shall remain thereon, under the same conditions as voters who are nationals, until they request to be removed or until they are removed because they no longer satisfy the requirements for exercising the right to vote. Where provisions of the Member State of residence are in place to notify nationals of such a removal from the electoral roll, these provisions shall apply to Union voters in the same way.
Amendment 102 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Member State of residence shall inform the persons concerned in good time and in clearly and plain languagein a timely manner of the decision taken on their application for entry on the electoral roll or of the decision concerning the admissibility of their application to stand as a candidate.
Amendment 109 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall designate a nationalcompetent authority with responsibility for taking the necessary measures to ensure that non-national Union citizens are informed clearly and in a timely manner of the conditions and detailed rules for registration as a voter or candidate in elections to the European Parliament.
Amendment 110 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Member States shall ensure that the authorities designated pursuant to paragraph 1, shall directly and individually communicate to Union voters and Union nationals entitled to stand as candidates, clearly and in a timely manner, the following information:
Amendment 117 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Amendment 123 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall, in addition to being communicated in one or more of the official languages of the host Member State, also be accompanied by a translation in at least one other official language of the Union that is broadly understood by the largest possible number of Union citizens residing on its territory, in accordance with the quality requirements of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council30. 30 Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 October 2018 establishing a single digital gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and to assistance and problem-solving services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 1).
Amendment 125 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall ensure that information on conditions and detailed rules for registration as a voter or candidate in elections to the European Parliament and information referred to in paragraph 2 is made accessible to persons with disabilities and older persons by using appropriate means, modes and formats of communication that are appropriate for them.
Amendment 140 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Amendment 143 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt implementing acts for the purpose of defining the common indicators referred to in paragraph 1, in accordance with the requirements laid down in Chapter IV of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 19.
Amendment 145 #
2021/0372(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Within two years after the 2029 elections to the European Parliament, the Commission shall assess its application and produce an evaluation report on the progress towards achievement of the objectives contained herein. The evaluation shall also include a review on the functioning of Article 13. The report shall, if appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal.
Amendment 5 #
2021/0244(COD)
(1) FOptimising and facilitating access to financial information is necessary to prevent, detect, investigate or prosecute serious crime, including terrorism. In particular, swift access to financial information is essential for carrying out effective criminal investigations and for successfully tracing and subsequently confiscating instrumentalities and proceeds of crime.
Amendment 6 #
2021/0244(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Swift access to financial information is crucial in preventing and fighting crime effectively, particularly with regard to international activities, organised criminal groups, terrorism and cybercrime, and it could also be a great help in improving existing success rates when it comes to recovering criminal assets.
Amendment 7 #
2021/0244(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Considering the cross-border nature of organised crime, the financing of terrorism, and money laundering, as well as the importance of relevant financial information for the purposes of combating criminal activities, including by swiftly tracing, freezing and confiscating illegally obtained assets where possible and appropriate, authorities competent for the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of criminal offences designated in accordance with Directive (EU) 2019/1153 should be able to directly access and search the centralised bank account registries of other Member States through the BAR single access point put in place pursuant to Directive (EU) YYYY/XX.
Amendment 204 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Therefore, a European Authority for anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism, the Anti-Money Laundering Authority (‘the Authority’) should be established. The creation of this new Authority is crucial to ensure efficient and adequate supervision of obliged entities having high inherent Money Laundering/Terrorist Financing (ML/TF) risk, strengthening common supervisory approaches for non-selected obliged entities and facilitating joint analyses and cooperation between Financial Investigation Units (FIUs). The Authority should not in any way undermine the activities of national supervisory authorities or FIUs, or enter into hierarchical relationships with them.
Amendment 207 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The Authority should not challenge the decisions of national supervisory authorities, and in particular it should not investigate cases which have already been dealt with by the national authorities if no new facts have been brought to light in the cases concerned.
Amendment 208 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) The national supervisory authorities’ responsibilities vis-à-vis the Authority (including the range of documents and information to be made available) should be precisely defined in order to avoid discretion in this regard and arbitrary top-down orders on the part of the Authority.
Amendment 232 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)
Recital 14 a (new)
(14a) The Authority should only have access to operational information that the Member States’ FIUs agree to make available in the context of joint analyses. The FIUs nevertheless remain the sole owners of the information they make available to the Authority.
Amendment 258 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In addition to supervisory powers and in order to ensure compliance, in cases of material breaches of directly applicable requirements, the Authority, in cooperation with the national supervisory authorities, should be able to impose administrative pecuniary sanctions on the selected obliged entities. Such sanctions, the level of which must in every case be established in consultation with the national supervisory authorities, should be proportionate and dissuasive, should have both punitive and deterrent effect, and should comply with the principle of ne bis in idem. The maximum amounts of pecuniary sanctions should be in line with those established by [please insert reference – 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive] and available to all supervisory authorities across the Union. The basic amounts of these sanctions should be determined within the limits established by the AML/CFT framework, taking into account the nature of the requirements that have been breached. In order for the Authority to take aggravating or mitigating factors adequately into account, adjustments to the relevant basic amount should be possible. With the objective to achieve a timely change of the damaging business practice, the Executive Board of the Authority should be empowered to impose periodic penalty payments to compel the relevant legal or natural person to cease the relevant conduct. With the aim to heighten awareness of all obliged entities, by encouraging them to adopt business practices in line with the AML/CFT framework, the sanctions and penalties should be disclosed. The Court of Justice should have jurisdiction to review the legality of decisions adopted by the Authority, the Council and the Commission, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU, as well as for determining their non-contractual liability.
Amendment 260 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) For non-selected obliged entities, the AML/CFT supervision is to remain primarily at national level, with national competent authorities retaining full responsibility and accountability for direct supervision. The Authority should be granted adequate indirect supervisory powers to ensure that supervisory actions at national level are consistent and of a high quality across the Union. Therefore, it should carry out assessments of the state of supervisory convergence and publish reports with its findings. It should be empowered to issue guidelines and recommendations, addressed to both obliged entities as well as supervisory authorities, with a view to ensuring harmonised and high -level supervisory practices across the Union.
Amendment 429 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) to requestsubmit requests to FIUs to make available data and analyses from FIUs that are relevant to the assessment of threats, vulnerabilities and risks facing the internal market in relation to money laundering and terrorist financing;
Amendment 679 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The pecuniary sanctions imposed by the Authority in its supervision of obliged institutions shall be established in consultation with the national supervisory authorities.
Amendment 700 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Executive Board shall by decision, after consulting the national supervisory authorities, impose a periodic penalty payment in order to compel:
Amendment 717 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. The Authority shall not investigate cases which have already been dealt with by the national authorities if no new facts have been brought to light in the cases concerned;
Amendment 843 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3
Article 33 – paragraph 3
3. Upon explicit consent of the FIUs participating in the joint analysis, the staff of the Authority supporting the joint analysis shall be granted access to all the data pertaining to the subject-matter of the joint analysis and shall be able to process those datathat the FIU is willing to make available on the basis of that consent. FIUs shall remain the sole owners of the operational information they exchange with other institutions.
Amendment 890 #
2021/0240(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 43 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 100 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. Evaluations mayshall cover all aspects ofonly those aspects that are strictly related to the Schengen acquis and may take into account the functioning of the authorities that apply the Schengen acquis.
Amendment 117 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall be responsible for the establishment of thehave an overall coordination role in relation to establishing annual and multiannual evaluation programmes, the drafting of questionnaires, the and setting of schedules of visits, the conducting of visits and the drafting of evaluation reports and recommendations. It shall also ensure the follow-up and monitoring activities.
Amendment 129 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may organise unannounced evaluations, in particular:
Amendment 133 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 135 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 161 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shallmay use the results of relevant mechanisms and instruments, including evaluation and monitoring activities of Union bodies, offices and agencies which are involved in the implementation of the Schengen acquis and of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights as well as of independent national monitoring mechanisms and bodies and other national quality control mechanisms in preparing the evaluation and monitoring activities, to improve awareness on the functioning of the Schengen area and to avoid the duplication of efforts and conflicting measures.
Amendment 169 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
In the programming and implementation of the evaluations and monitoring activities, the Commission shallmay take into account information provided by third parties, including independent authorities, non- governmental organisations and international organisations.
Amendment 175 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
In each multiannual evaluation cycle, each Member State shall undergo one periodic evaluation and at least one unannounced evaluation or thematic evaluation.
Amendment 181 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 190 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Amendment 194 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall define the number of Member State experts and Commission representatives participating in a team based on the particularities and needs of the evaluation or monitoring activity. The Commission shall select experts from the pool of experts to become members of a team. The total number of the team members shall be no more than 12 and the number of the experts from the Commission together with the observers from Union bodies and agencies shall not exceed the number of the experts from the Member States
Amendment 201 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 6
Article 18 – paragraph 6
Amendment 205 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 9 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. The Commission after receiving feedback from lead experts shall transmit an opinion on their performance to the concerned Member State, especially when it concerns a new expert in the pool.
Amendment 216 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 19 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Unannounced visits shall take place without prior notification to the Member State concerned. By way of exception, tThe Commission mayshall notify the Member State concerned at least 24 hours before such visit is to take place when the main purpose of the unannounced visit is a random verification of the implementation of the Schengen acquis.
Amendment 226 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) compliant but improvement necessary;
Amendment 231 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6
Article 21 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall transmit the draft evaluation report to the evaluated Member State within four weeks of the end of the evaluation activity. The evaluated Member State shall provide its comments on the draft evaluation report within two weeks of its receipt. A drafting meeting shall be held at the request of the evaluated Member State, no later than fiveten working days from the receipt of the comments from the evaluated Member State. The comments of the evaluated Member State mayshall be reflected in the draft evaluation report.
Amendment 241 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council at least twice a yearon an ongoing basis about the state of implementation of the action plans. The Commission shall in particular provide information about its observations on the adequacy of the action plans referred to in paragraph 2, the outcome of revisits and verification visits and whether it observes considerable lack of progress in the implementation of an action plan.
Amendment 245 #
2021/0140(CNS)
3. The evaluation report drafted in accordance with Article 21(2), (3) and (4) shall focus oninclude the findings that lead to the determination of a serious deficiency. It shall not contain recommendations. The Commission shall transmit the draft evaluation report to the evaluated Member State within two weeks of the end of the evaluation activity.
Amendment 270 #
2021/0140(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 34 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the very concept of Schengen cooperation, that of ensuring the absence of controls at internal borders, has been further challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been added to the grounds invoked since 2015 for the persistent retention of internal border controls by some Member States; reiterates its condemnation of; notes the maintenance of internal border checks and itstakes the view that many of the prolongations are not in line with the rules pertaining to their extension, necessity or proportionality, and are therefore unlawful;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Deplores the factNotes that internal border controls are continuing to be introduced by some Member States as a unilateral response to new challenges, before they have given proper consideration to the common European interest inextraordinary challenges; stresses that maintaining Schengen as an area without internal border controls is in the common interest of all Member States; reiterates its call on the Commission to exercise appropriate scrutiny over the application of the Schengen acquis, including through the use of infringement procedures, and underlines the urgent need to enhance mutual trust and cooperation among the Schengen states and appropriate governance for the Schengen area;
Amendment 93 #
2020/2196(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Deeply regrets the fact that there have been persistent and serious reports about violence and pushbacks at the external border, as well as the lack of adequate monitoring mechanisms to ensure respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law at the external borders; considers that the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) must be given an enhanced operational role with regard to the monitoring of respect for fundamental rights at the external borders;
Amendment 18 #
2020/2194(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Reminds that the Union agencies are playing an increasingly important part in the Union, but their role in serving Union citizens effectively needs to be evaluated more carefully;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2181(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Reminds that all Union agencies must rigorously comply with the Financial Regulation and the high standards of management.
Amendment 23 #
2020/2172(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Reminds that according to the Financial Regulation all Union bodies must make payments within prescribed terms; however notes that the Agency frequently failed to do so exposing therefore the Agency to reputational risk;
Amendment 10 #
2020/2158(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 9 #
2020/2153(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. EU institutions must rigorously comply with financial regulation and high management standards;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2152(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 33 #
2020/2144(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32 a. Welcomes the fact that the Court sees a strong increase in media interest with particularly high coverage of its special reports;
Amendment 1 #
2020/2142(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Council and of the Council for the financial year 2019 / Postpones its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Council and of the Council for the financial year 2019;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2142(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Emphasises Parliament's prerogative to grant discharge pursuant to Article 319 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union, and the applicable provisions of the Financial Regulation and Parliament’s Rules of Procedure in line with current interpretation and practice, namely to grant discharge in order to maintain transparency and ensure democratic accountability towards Union taxpayers;
Amendment 50 #
2020/2142(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35 a. Notes that over the course of almost twenty years Parliament has developed the practice of granting discharge to all Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies;
Amendment 53 #
2020/2142(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. ENotes that the different roles of the respective institutions in the discharge procedures should be distinguished; emphasises that Parliament does not accept that the two institutions have an equivalent and reciprocal role in the discharge procedure;
Amendment 19 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Reiterates its call on the Secretary- General to insist on the need for real geographical balance in terms of proportional representation of all Member States at all levels of staff, including top management; notes the difficulties Parliament encountered in recruiting some nationalities; stresses the importance of increasing the attractiveness of Parliament as an employer throughout all Member States;
Amendment 162 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
Paragraph 86 a (new)
86 a. Geographic dispersion of Parliament - Single Seat
Amendment 163 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 b (new)
Paragraph 86 b (new)
86 b. Recalls that a vast majority of Parliament expressed in various resolutions support for a single seat to ensure efficient spending of Union taxpayers money;
Amendment 170 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 c (new)
Paragraph 86 c (new)
86 c. Notes that the Court has estimated that moving from Strasbourg to Brussels could generate annual savings of 114 million;
Amendment 171 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 d (new)
Paragraph 86 d (new)
86 d. Recalls that additional expenditure caused by the travels to Strasbourg goes against the principle of sound financial management;
Amendment 185 #
2020/2141(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
Paragraph 90
90. Recalls that, at its meeting of 10 December 2018, the Bureau decided to modify the rules applicable to the pension scheme by increasing the retirement age from 63 to 65 years and introducing a levy of 5% to pension payments for future pensioners with a view to improve its sustainability; welcomes that the immediate effects of the rules change were savings in the 2019 pensions payments amounting to approximately EUR 325 000, that of these, EUR 306 000 stem from the increase in pension age and EUR 19 000 stem from the introduction of a 5% levy to all pensions established after 1 January 2019; asks that the Bureau evaluate all possible options as soon as the Court of Justice has made its decisions regarding the current measures in order to find a fair solution to the voluntary pension scheme and fund while keeping Parliament's liability to a minimum as Union taxpayers’ money is involved;
Amendment 20 #
2020/2140(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Reminds that the functioning of the agencies implies high costs and heavy administrative burden; stresses therefore that their activities and effectiveness in the service of citizens should always be carefully analysed and assessed;
Amendment 22 #
2020/2140(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Stresses the need to ensure clear and simple rules for all forms of Union financing, while maintaining effective controls in order to verify how funds are spent and whether the expected results have been achieved;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the European Council has a de facto right of initiative when defining the strategic guidelines for legislative planning within the area of freedom, security and justice, which does not constitute a level playing field between Parliament and the Council; underlines moreover the early influence byvolvement of the Member States via their participation in numerous Commission advisory bodies;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 35 #
2020/2132(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 7 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
— having regard to a joint statement on Belarus of EPP, S&D, Renew Europe, Greens/EFA and ECR groups in the European Parliament of 17 August 2020,
Amendment 29 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas despite the fundamental restrictions on basic freedoms and human rights that remain in Belarus, the EU policy of critical engagement with Belarus has produced some results in the form of signed agreements and increased cooperation; whereas future relations between the EU and Belarus will be defined in the Partnership Priorities to be agreed by both sideEU and new legitimate, democratically elected authorities in Belarus;
Amendment 32 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the people of Belarus share common European heritage and culture, while directly neighbouring three EU Member States; whereas situation in Belarus may have direct impact on the EU;
Amendment 45 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the OSCE ODIHR International Election Observation Mission noted an overallnone of either the parliamentary or presidential elections held in Belarus from 1994 to date have been free and fair, but despite these harsh undemocratic conditions the people of Belarus clearly voted for a change, after more than two decades of oppression; whereas recent presidential elections were neither free nor fair and even more than the previous ones were marred with disregard for the fundamental freedoms of assembly, association and expression during the 2019 parliamentary elections, whichand took place after a limited amount of campaigning and within an extremely restrictive environment that did not provide for a meaningful or competitive political contest overall;
Amendment 52 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the 2020 presidential elections have thus far followed the same pattern as the parliamentary electionssimilar pattern as previous elections; whereas after publication of falsified results, Belarusian people immediately organised peaceful protests, which were suppressed by brutal force, which resulted in thousands of protestors being arrested, tortured, wounded, and some even killed; whereas the United Nations human rights investigators alarmed on 01/09 that they had received reports of hundreds of cases of torture, beatings and mistreatment of anti-government protesters by police in Belarus and urged the authorities to stop any such abuse;
Amendment 88 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas human rights and democracy in Belarus have been deliberately and brutally restricted by the Belarusian authorities over the past decades, while representatives of the opposition, civil society and media in the country have been regularly arrested or otherwise persecuted;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the Belarusian regime seeks to intimidate and to disperse the Coordination Council of Belarus by targeting its members and launching a criminal case against them;
Amendment 96 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E d (new)
Recital E d (new)
Ed. whereas Belsat TV channel, which is officially registered in Poland, so far has not been registered in Belarus, while its activities are under constant pressure and attacks, including brutal detentions of its journalists and fines imposed to its contributors amounting to USD 101,791 as of 18 June 2020;
Amendment 109 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas 26 years in power or Lukashenka had been marked by policies of undermining sovereignty and independence of the country and weakening of Belarusian identity, heritage and culture;
Amendment 162 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) acknowledge territorial integrity of Belarus and support the sovereignty of Belarus against pressure from the Russian Federation for deeper integration and remind Belarus that the European Union is open to further development of relations with the country both bilaterally and within the Eastern Partnership framework if Belarus meets conditions linked to democracy, the rule of law, international law, human rights and fundamental freedoms;
Amendment 165 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Amendment 221 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
(e) pay close attention to the presidential election campaign and insist that a lack of progress in conducting elections according to international standards and further crackdowns against the opposition will have direct adverse effects on relations wicall for holding new and transparent Presidential and Parliamentary elections in Belarus that would meet the democratic standards and call on the EU, OSCE, CoE to engage in dialogue with the Belarusian civil society with a view to launch a new electoral process, under the supervision of a new Electoral Commission, a body that can be trusted by all the parties including international observers, under the the EUight international scrutiny;
Amendment 226 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) deny recognition of the results of the elections held in Belarus on 9 August 2020 and Alexander Lukashenko as a legitimate leader President of Belarus; accordingly, call on him to respect the decision of the people of Belarus and peacefully step down;
Amendment 231 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(eb) applaud the Belarusian people for their courage and determination and to strongly support their desire for democratic change and freedom and basing their country’s future on principles of democracy, rule of law and human rights, so as to ensure freedom, independence, sovereignty and prosperity of the Republic of Belarus;
Amendment 233 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point e c (new)
Amendment 236 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e d (new)
Paragraph 1 – point e d (new)
(ed) deplore persecution of the members of the opposition Coordination Council and call the authorities to enter into the dialogue with the protestors in order to end the violence and repressions and prepare a new elections;
Amendment 248 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) condemn efforts of the Belarusian regime to deny entrance to the country for Belarusians critical towards it, as well as independent journalists, human rights workers, as well as representatives of international community, including Members of the European Parliament;
Amendment 254 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Amendment 270 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point g c (new)
(gc) note that China's president was the first to congratulate Lukashenka after the elections; to express concerns over increasing Chinese investments in strategic infrastructure and warn about the effect of dependency it might create for Belarus;
Amendment 289 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point i
Paragraph 1 – point i
(i) condemn the ongoing intimidation and persecution of opposition figures, including presidential hopefuls, civil society activists and independent journalists; strongly condemn the suppression of internet and media, road blockades, and intimidation of journalists in order to stop the flow of information about the situation in the country as well as denial of access to Belarus for international media, members of parliament or government of democratic community;
Amendment 300 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point i b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point i b (new)
(ib) welcome numerous acts of solidarity with the people of Belarus, including fundraising, charity and humanitarian assistance; in this regard condemn stopping of humanitarian aid transport organised by "NSZZ Solidarnosc";
Amendment 304 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
(ja) approve the European universal human rights sanctions (European Magnitsky Act) as a regime providing, at the EU level, for restrictive measures, including entry bans and freezing of funds, against individuals liable for violations of human rights and freedoms and responsible for other crimes;
Amendment 325 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
Amendment 362 #
2020/2081(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point o b (new)
(ob) work together with the European Commission in order to develop a comprehensive programme for Belarus after the new presidential elections are held, which would allow Belarus to transition towards a free market economy and an open democratic state;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 23
Citation 23
Amendment 33 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 25
Citation 25
Amendment 68 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the preceding decade has seen brazen attacks against Union values in several Member States; whereas international comparisons and Parliament resolutions have evidenced considerable democratic backsliding in Hungary and Poland in particularinternational comparisons and Parliament resolutions regularly monitor democratic standards in the Member States; whereas Parliament has been calling since 2016 for a comprehensive, preventive and evidence- based monitoring in this field via an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights;
Amendment 78 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas breaches of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU weaken the cohesion of the European project, the rights of all Union citizens and mutual trust among the Member Statestrengthen the rights of all Union citizens;
Amendment 84 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Commission is preparing to publish an annual rule of law report, to be followed by a Strategy for the Implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and a European Democracy Action Plan;
Amendment 89 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas athe European Court of Auditors has issued an opinion regarding the regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, conce adopted, would become an indispensable tool in safeguardluding that the regulation lacks clear and detailed criteria and definitions of deficiencies ing the rule of law within the Union;
Amendment 92 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. Emphasises that the opinion of the Council Legal Service of 25 October 2018 concluded that secondary legislation cannot circumvent the procedure laid down in Article 7 TEU and that the rule of law cannot be used as a criterion triggering the mechanism referred to in the Commission’s proposal for a regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, since this would lead to the circumvention of Article 7 TEU and would be equivalent to it, and would subsequently be easy to challenge before the Court of Justice of the European Union;
Amendment 101 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas any monitoring mechanism must closely involve stakeholders active in the protection and promotion of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, including civil society, Council of Europe and United Nations bodies, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, national human rights institutions, national parliaments and national and local authorities;
Amendment 111 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. emphasises the urgent need for the Union to develop a robust and positive agenda for protecting and reinforcing democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights for all its citizens; Insists that the Union must remain a champion of freedom and justice in Europe and the world;
Amendment 121 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Warns that the Union is facing an unprecedented and escalating crisis of its founding values, which threatens its long- term survival as a democratic peace project; is gravely concerned by the rise and entrenchment of autocratic and illiberal tendencies, further compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic andis gravely concerned by the economic recession, as well as corruption, and state capture, in several Member States; underlines the dangers of this trendthey present for the cohesion of the Union’s legal order, the functioning of itsthe single market, and the effectiveness of its common policies and its international credibility;
Amendment 132 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recognises that the Union remainsis already structurally ill-equipped to tackle democratic and rule of law backsliding in the Member States; regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in enforcing Union values in ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures; notes with concern the disjointed nature of the Union’s toolkit in that fieldconsiders that the Council effectively enforces Union values;
Amendment 147 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. WelcomNotes the Commission’s work on the Annual Rule of Law Report; notes, however, that it fails to encompass the areas of democracy and fundamental rights; reiterates the need for a comprehensive monitoring mechanism enshrined in a legal act binding Parliament, the Council and the Commission to a transparent and regularised process, with clearly defined responsibilities, so that the protection and promotion of Union values becomes a permanent and visible part of the Union agenda;
Amendment 155 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 170 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines that the Annual Monitoring Cycle must contain country- specific recommendations, with timelines and targets for implementation, to be followed up in subsequent annual or urgent reports; stresses that failures to implement the recommendations must be linked to concrete Union enforcement measures;
Amendment 174 #
2020/2072(INL)
Amendment 177 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that the Mechanism should consolidate and supersede existing instruments, in particular the Annual Rule of Law Report, the Commission’s Rule of Law Framework, the Council’s Rule of Law Dialogue and the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM), while increasing complementarity and coherence with other available tools, including infringement procedures under Article 7 TEU, budgetary conditionality once in force, and the European Semester; is of the opinion that the Annual Monitoring Cycle can fulfil the objectives of the CVM for Bulgaria and Romania, thus contributing to equal treatment of all Member States; considers that the three institutions should use the findings from the Annual Monitoring Cycle in their assessment for the purposes of triggering Article 7 TEU and Regulation (EU) 2020/xxxx of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union's budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States11; _________________ 11[instead of xxxx insert final number of 2018/136(COD) in the text and correct OJ reference in footnote] OJ C ..., …, p. …
Amendment 198 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Reaffirms the role of Parliament, in accordance with Article 7 TEU, in monitoring compliance with Union values; reiterates the call for Parliament to be present in Article 7 hearings when it is Parliament that initiated the procedure; believes that the Mechanism, underpinned by an interinstitutional agreement, will provide the necessary framework for better coordination;
Amendment 206 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is of the view that, in the long- term, strengthening the Union’s ability to promote and defend its constitutional core will require Treaty change; looks forward to the reflection and conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe in that regard both the Member States and the Union will help to promote and defend fundamental values;
Amendment 210 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 218 #
2020/2072(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 221 #
Amendment 71 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. This Regulation complements and is without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC.
Amendment 88 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
(23 a) ‘Profiling’ means profiling as defined in Article 4(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 91 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
(23 b) ‘Consent’ of the data subject means consent as defined in Article 4(11) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679;
Amendment 95 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A provider of core platform servicesn undertaking shall be designated as gatekeeper if:
Amendment 97 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it operatprovides a core platform service which serves as an important gateway for business users to reach end users; and
Amendment 99 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. A provider of core platform servicesn undertaking shall be presumed to satisfy:
Amendment 110 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission shall regularly, and at least every 2 years, review whether the designated gatekeepers continue to satisfy the requirements laid down in Article 3(1), or whether new providers of core platform services satisfy those requirements. The regular review shall also examine whether the list of affected core platform services of the gatekeeper which individually serve as an important gateway for business users to reach end users as referred to in Article 3(1)(b) needs to be adjusted.
Amendment 111 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the Commission, on the basis of thate review pursuant to the first subparagraph, finds that the facts on which the designation of the providers ofundertaking providing core platform services as gatekeepers was based, have changed, it shall adopt a corresponding decisiondecision in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 37a(2), confirming, amending or repealing its previous decision designating the undertaking providing core platforms services as a gatekeeper.
Amendment 114 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) refrain from combining personal data sourced from theseany of its core platform services with personal data from any other core platform service or other services offered by the gatekeeper or with personal data from third-party services, and from signing in end users to other services of the gatekeeper in order to combine personal data, unless the end user has been presented with the specific choice and provided consent in the sense of Article 6(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679. The gatekeeper may rely on the legal basis included under Article 6(1)(c), (d) and(e) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, where applicable;
Amendment 121 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from preventing or restricting business users from raising issues with any relevant public authority, including national courts relating to any practice of gatekeepers;
Amendment 123 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) refrain from requiring business users to use,or end users to use, and in the case of business users, also to offer or interoperate with, an identification service of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper;
Amendment 140 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) refrain from treating more favourably in ranking services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself or by any third party belonging to the same undertaking compared to similar services or products of third party and apply fair and non- discriminatory conditions to such ranking;
Amendment 145 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) allow business users and providers of ancillary services access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services. The gatekeeper shall not be prevented from taking necessary and proportionate measures to ensure that third party ancillary services do not endanger the integrity of the operating system, hardware or software features provided by the gatekeeper, provided that such proportionate measures are duly justified by the gatekeeper;
Amendment 158 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) provide business users, or third parties authorised by a business user, free of charge, with effective, high-quality, continuous and real-time access and use of aggregated or non-aggregated data, including personal data, that is provided for or generated in the context of the use of the relevant core platform services by those business users and the end users engaging with the products or services provided by those business users; for personal data, provide access and use only where the data are directly connected with the use effectuated by the end user in respect of the products or services offered by the relevant business user through the relevant core platform service, and when the end user opts in to such sharing with a consent in the sense of theArticle 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679; ;
Amendment 162 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) provide to any third party providers of online search engines, upon their request, with access on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms to ranking, query, click and view data in relation to free and paid search generated by end users on online search engines of the gatekeeper, subject to anonymisation for the query, click and view data that constitutes personal data. The relevant data is anonymized if personal data is irreversibly altered in such a way that information does not relate to an identified or identifiable natural person or personal data rendered anonymous in such a manner that the data subject is not or no longer identifiable;
Amendment 169 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(k a) refrain from making unsubscribing from a core platform service unnecessarily difficult or complicated for business users or end users
Amendment 174 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 7
Article 7 – paragraph 7
7. A gatekeeper may request the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18 for the Commission to determine whether the measures that the gatekeeper intends to implement or has implemented under Article 6 are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances. A gatekeeper mayshall, with its request, provide a reasoned submission to explain in particular why the measures that it intends to implement or has implemented are effective in achieving the objective of the relevant obligation in the specific circumstances. . The Commission may open proceedings pursuant to Article 18 and by decision adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 37a(2) specify the measures that the gatekeeper concerned shall implement. The Commission shall adopt a decision pursuant to this provision within six months from the opening of proceedings pursuant to Article 18.
Amendment 186 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Within six months after its designation pursuant to Article 3, a gatekeeper shall submit to the Commission an independently audited description of any techniques for profiling of consumend users that the gatekeeper applies to or across its core platform services identified pursuant to Article 3. This descriptione gatekeeper makes publicly available an overview of the audited description taking into account the limitations imposed by the requirements of business secrecy. The description and its publicly available overview shall be updated at least annually.
Amendment 209 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. When threewo or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 15 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a provider of core platform services should be designated as a gatekeeper, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation.
Amendment 210 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. When two or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 16 because they consider that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a gatekeeper has systematically infringed the obligations laid down in Articles 5 and 6 and has further strengthened or extended its gatekeeper position in relation to the characteristics under Article 3(1), the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and the result of such examination shall be published.
Amendment 212 #
2020/0374(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. 1b. When two or more Member States request the Commission to open an investigation pursuant to Article 17 because they consider that one or more services within the digital sector should be added to the list of core platform services pursuant to Article 2(2) or that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that one or several types of practices are not effectively addressed by this Regulation and may limit the contestability of core platform services or may be unfair, the Commission shall within four months examine whether there are reasonable grounds to open such an investigation and the result of such examination should be published.
Amendment 140 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to achieve the objective of ensuring a safe, predictable and trusted online environment, for the purpose of this Regulation the concept of “illegal content” should be defined broadly and alsunderpin the general idea that what is illegal offline should also be illegal online. The concept should be defined broadly to covers information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable law is either itself illegal, such as illegal hate speech or terrorist content and unlawful discriminatory content, or that relates to activities that are illegal, such as the sharing of images depicting child sexual abuse, unlawful non- consensual sharing of private images, online stalking, the sale of non-compliant or counterfeit products, the non-authorised use of copyright protected material or activities involving infringements of consumer protection law. In this regard, it is immaterial whether the illegality of the information or activity results from Union law or from national law that is consistent with Union law and what the precise nature or subject matter is of the law in question.
Amendment 155 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) A provider of intermediary services that deliberately collaborates with a recipient of the services in order to undertake illegal activities does not provide its service neutrally andor the main purpose of which is to engage in or facilitate such activities should therefore not be able to benefit from the exemptions from liability provided for in this Regulation.
Amendment 207 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Online advertisement plays an important role in the online environment, including in relation to the provision of the services of online platforms. However, online advertisement can contribute to significant risks, ranging from advertisement that is itself illegal content, to contributing to financial incentives for the publication or amplification of illegal or otherwise harmful content and activities online, or the discriminatory display of advertising with an impact on the equal treatment and opportunities of citizens. In addition to the requirements resulting from Article 6 of Directive 2000/31/EC, online platforms should therefore be required to ensure that the recipients of the service have certain individualised information necessary for them to understand when and on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed. In addition, recipients of the service should have information on the main parameters used for determining that specific advertising is to be displayed to them, providing meaningful explanations of the logic used to that end, including when this is based on profiling. The parameters shall include, if applicable, the optimisation goal selected by the advertiser, information on the use of custom lists and in such case – the category and source of personal data uploaded to the online platform and the legal basis for uploading this personal data pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679, information on the use of lookalike audiences and in such case – relevant information on the seed audience and an explanation why the recipient of the advertisement has been determined to be part of the lookalike audience, meaningful information about the online platform’s algorithms or other tools used to optimise the delivery of the advertisement, including a specification of the optimisation goal and a meaningful explanation of reasons why the online platform has decided that the optimisation goal can be achieved by displaying the advertisement to this recipient. The requirements of this Regulation on the provision of information relating to advertisement is without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular those regarding the right to object, automated individual decision-making, including profiling and specifically the need to obtain consent of the data subject prior to the processing of personal data for targeted advertising. Similarly, it is without prejudice to the provisions laid down in Directive 2002/58/EC in particular those regarding the storage of information in terminal equipment and the access to information stored therein.
Amendment 224 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
(58) Very large online platforms should deploy the necessary means to diligently mitigate the systemic risks identified in the risk assessment. Very large online platforms should under such mitigating measures consider, for example, enhancing or otherwise adapting the design and functioning of their content moderation, algorithmic recommender systems and online interfaces, so that they discourage and limit the dissemination of illegal content, adapting their decision-making processes, or adapting their terms and conditions. They may also include corrective measures, such as discontinuing advertising revenue for specific content, or other actions, such as improving the visibility of authoritative information sources. Very large online platforms mayshould reinforce their internal processes or supervision of any of their activities, in particular as regards the detection of systemic risks. They mayshould also initiate or increase cooperation with trusted flaggers, organise training sessions and exchanges with trusted flagger organisations, and cooperate with other service providers, including by initiating or joining existing codes of conduct or other self-regulatory measures. Any measures adopted should respect the due diligence requirements of this Regulation and be effective and appropriate for mitigating the specific risks identified, in the interest of safeguarding public order, protecting privacy and fighting fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices, and should be proportionate in light of the very large online platform’s economic capacity and the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on the use of their service, taking due account of potential negative effects on the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service.
Amendment 255 #
2020/0361(COD)
(76) In the absence of a general requirement for providers of intermediary services to ensure a physical presence within the territory of one of the Member States, there is a need to ensure clarity under which Member State's jurisdiction those providers fall for the purposes of enforcing the rules laid down in Chapters III and IV by the national competent authorities. A provider should be under the jurisdiction of the Member State where its main establishment is located, that is, where the provider has its head office or registered office within which the principal financial functions and operational control are exercised. In respect of providers that do not have an establishment in the Union but that offer services in the Union and therefore fall within the scope of this Regulation, the Member State where those providers appointed their legal representative should have jurisdiction, considering the function of legal representatives under this Regulation. In the interest of the effective application of this Regulation, all Member States should, however, have jurisdiction in respect of providers that failed to designate a legal representative, provided that the principle of ne bis in idem is respected. To that aim, each Member State that exercises jurisdiction in respect of such providers should, without undue delay, inform all other Member States of the measures they have taken in the exercise of that jurisdiction. In addition in order to ensure effective protection of fundamental rights of EU citizens that take into account diverse national law sand difference in socio-cultural context between countries, a Member State shall exercise jurisdiction where it concerns very large online platforms which offer services to a significant number of recipients in a given Member State. Member States jurisdiction is particularly important in case of very large online platforms which are social media because they play a central role in facilitating the public debate
Amendment 262 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 91
Recital 91
(91) The Board should bring together the representatives of the Digital Services Coordinators and possible other competent authorities under the chairmanship of the Commission, with a view to ensuring an assessment of matters submitted to it in a fully European dimension. In view of possible cross-cutting elements that may be of relevance for other regulatory frameworks at Union level, the Board should be allowed to cooperate with other Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups with responsibilities in fields such as equality, including equality between women and men, and non- discrimination, data protection, competition, electronic communications, audiovisual services, detection and investigation of frauds against the EU budget as regards custom duties, or consumer protection, as necessary for the performance of its tasks.
Amendment 330 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall, upon the receipt of an order to act against a specific item or multiple items of illegal content, issued by the relevant national judicial or administrative authorities, on the basis of the applicable Union or national law, in conformity with Union law, inform the authority issuing the order of the effect given to the orders, without undue delay, specifying the action taken and the moment when the action was taken.
Amendment 356 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. The Digital Services Coordinator of each Member State, on its own initiative, within 72 hours of receiving the copy of the order to act, has the right to scrutinise the order to determine whether it seriously or manifestly infringes the respective Member State’s law and revoke the order on its own territory.
Amendment 390 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Providers of intermediary services shall make public the information necessary to easily identify and communicate with their single points of contact, including postal address, and ensure that that information is up to date. Providers of intermediary services shall notify that information, including the name, postal address, the electronic mail address and telephone number, of their single point of contact, to the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where they are established.
Amendment 392 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. Providers of intermediary services shall notify valid identification data, including the name, postal address, the electronic mail address and telephone number of their legal representative to the Digital Service Coordinator in the Member State where that legal representative resides or is established. They shall ensure that that information is up to date.
Amendment 394 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Very large online platform defined in art. 25, at the request of the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member States where this provider offers its services, shall designate a legal representative to be bound to obligations laid down in this article
Amendment 398 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of intermediary services shall include information on any restrictions that they impose in relation to the use of their service in respect of information provided by the recipients of the service, in their terms and conditions. That information shall include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear plain, intelligible and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format.
Amendment 407 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Very large online platforms as defined in article 25, should publish their terms and conditions in all official languages of the Union.
Amendment 408 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 410 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Notwithstanding the right in article 12(3), the Digital Services Coordinator of each Member State, by means of national legislation, may seek to request from a very large online platform to cooperate with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State in question in handling specific legal content removal cases in which there is reason to believe that Member State’s socio-cultural context may have played a vital role.
Amendment 420 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the number of notices submitted in accordance with Article 14, categorised by the type of alleged illegal content concerned, any action taken pursuant to the notices by differentiating whether the action was taken on the basis of the law or the terms and conditions of the provider, and the average and median time needed for taking the action;
Amendment 423 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the number of complaints received through the internal complaint-handling system referred to in Article 17, the basis for those complaints, decisions taken in respect of those complaints, the average and median time needed for taking those decisions and the number of instances where those decisions were reversed.
Amendment 428 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 69, after consulting the Board, to lay down specific templates of reports specified in paragraph 1.
Amendment 440 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) a clear indication of the electronic location of that information, in particular the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, and applicable additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content which shall be appropriate to the type of content and to the specific type of intermediary;
Amendment 486 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
This Section shall not apply to online platforms that qualify as micro or small enterprises within the meaning of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC and which do not engage in illegal activity.
Amendment 495 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) any other decisions that affect the availability, visibility or accessibility of that content and the recipient’s account or the recipient’s access to significant features of the platform’s regular services
Amendment 505 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Online platforms shall inform complainants without undue delay of the decision they have taken in respect of the information to which the complaint relates and shall inform complainants of the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement provided for in Article 18 and other available redress possibilities. This feedback shall also include: - information on whether the decision referred to in paragraph 1 was taken as a result of human review or through automated means - in case the decision referred to in paragraph 1 is tobe sustained, detailed explanation on how the information to which the complaint relates is in breach of the platform’s terms and conditions or why the online platform finds the information unlawful.
Amendment 508 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5
Article 17 – paragraph 5
5. Online platforms shall ensure that the decisions, referred to in paragraph 4, are not solely taken on the basis of automated means. Complainants shall have the right to request human review and consultation with relevant online platforms’ staff with respect to content to which the complaint relates to.
Amendment 511 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Recipients of the service negatively affected by the decision of an online platform shall have the possibility to seek swift judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member States concerned. The procedure shall ensure that an independent judicial body decides on the matter without undue delay, resolving the case no later than within 14 days while granting then negatively affected party the right to seek interim measures to be imposed within 48 hours since the recourse is brought before this body. The right to seek a judicial redress and interim measures will not be limited or conditioned on exhausting the internal complaint-handling system.
Amendment 710 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall set out in or any otheir systerms and conditions, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner, the main parameters used used to determine the order of presentation of content, including their recommender systems, as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameat which decrease the visibility of content, shall set out in their terms that they may have made available, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.and conditions, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner, the main parameters used in these systems
Amendment 715 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. 2.The main parameters referred to in paragraph1 shall include, at minimum: (a) the main criteria used by the relevant recommender system, (b) how these criteria are weighted against each other, (c)the optimisation goal of the relevant recommender system, (d) explanation of the role that the behaviour of the recipients of the service plays in how the relevant recommender system functions.
Amendment 717 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. 3. Very large online platforms shall provide options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence parameters referred to in paragraph 2, including at least one option which is not based on profiling, within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679
Amendment 720 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2
Article 29 – paragraph 2
2. Where several options are available pursuant to paragraph 1, vVery large online platforms shall provide an easily accessible functionality on their online interface allowing the recipient of the service: a) to select and to modify at any time their preferred option for each of the recommender systems that determines the relative order of information presented to them, b) to select third party recommender systems.
Amendment 775 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission and the Board shall encouragehave the right to request and facilitate the drawing up of codes of conduct at Union level to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking into account in particular the specific challenges of tackling different types of illegal content and systemic risks, in accordance with Union law, in particular on competition and the protection of personal data.
Amendment 777 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Where significant systemic risk within the meaning of Article 26(1) emerge and concern several very large online platforms, the Commission may inviteshall request the very large online platforms concerned, other very large online platforms, other online platforms and other providers of intermediary services, as appropriate, as well as civil society organisations and other interested parties, to participate in the drawing up of codes of conduct, including by setting out commitments to take specific risk mitigation measures, as well as a regular reporting framework on any measures taken and their outcomes.
Amendment 796 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. 4: Member States shall exercise jurisdiction for the purposes of Chapters III and IV of this Regulation where it concerns very large online platforms, as defined in art. 25, which offer services to a significant number of active recipients of the service in a given Member State, which can be calculated on the basis of art. 23(2).
Amendment 805 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 1
Recipients of the service shall have the right to lodge a complaint against providers of intermediary services alleging an infringement of this Regulation with the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established. The Digital Services Coordinator shall assess the complaint and, where appropriate, transmit it to the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment. Assessment of the complaint can be supplemented by the opinion of Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State, where the recipient resides or is established, on how the matter should be resolved taking into account national law and socio-cultural context of a given Member State. Where the complaint falls under the responsibility of another competent authority in its Member State, the Digital Service Coordinator receiving the complaint shall transmit it to that authority.
Amendment 809 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 43 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Pursuant to paragraph 1 the Digital Services Coordinator of establishment in cases concerning complaint transmitted by the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established, should assess the matter in a timely manner and should inform the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the recipient resides or is established, on how the complaint has been handled.
Amendment 813 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 814 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. A recommendation pursuant to paragraph 1 and 2 may additionally indicate: a) an opinion on matters that involve taking into account national law and socio-cultural context; b) a draft decision based on investigation pursuant to paragraph1a
Amendment 818 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 7
Article 45 – paragraph 7
7. Where, pursuant to paragraph 6, the Commission concludes that the assessment or the investigatory or enforcement measures taken or envisaged pursuant to paragraph 4 are incompatible with this Regulation, it shall request the Digital Service Coordinator of establishment to further assess the matter and take the necessary investigatory or enforcement measures to ensure compliance with this Regulation, and to inform it about those measures taken within two months from that request. This information should be also transmitted to the Digital Services Coordinator or the Board that initiated the proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1.
Amendment 834 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 6
Article 48 – paragraph 6
6. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure, following the consent of and inform the Commission thereof.
Amendment 836 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) advise the Commission to take the measures referred to in Article 51 and, where requested by the Commission, adopt opinions on draft Commission measuradopt opinions on issues concerning very large online platforms in accordance with this Regulation;
Amendment 837 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) (f) issue opinions, recommendations or advice on matters related to Article 34.
Amendment 856 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1
Article 52 – paragraph 1
1. In order to carry out the tasks assigned to it under this Section, the Commission may by simple request or by decision require the very large online platforms concerned, their legal representatives, as well as any other persons acting for purposes related to their trade, business, craft or profession that may be reasonably be aware of information relating to the suspected infringement or the infringement, as applicable, including organisations performing the audits referred to in Articles 28 and 50(3), to provide such information within a reasonable time period.
Amendment 908 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 1
Article 73 – paragraph 1
1. By fivthree years after the entry into force of this Regulation at the latest, and every fivthree years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. On the basis of the findings and taking into utmost account the opinion of the Board, that report shall, where appropriate, be accompanied by a proposal for amendment of this Regulation.
Amendment 909 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 4
Article 73 – paragraph 4
Amendment 3 #
2020/0319(NLE)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Refuses to gGives its consent to the conclusion of the agreement;
Amendment 804 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v
Amendment 1546 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Where the applicant is in possession of a valid residence document, the Member State which issued the document shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. That responsibility shall cease after the applicant leaves the Member State which issued the residence document.
Amendment 1573 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Where it is established, on the basis of proof or circumstantial evidence as described in the two lists referred to in Article 30(4) of this Regulation, including the data referred to in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation], that an applicant has irregularly crossed the border into a Member State by land, sea or air having come from a third country, the first Member State thus entered shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection. That responsibility shall cease if the application is registered more than 3one years after the date on which that border crossing took place.
Amendment 1651 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) take back, under the conditions laid down in Articles 31 and 35 of this Regulation, a resettled or admitted person who has made an application for international protection or who is irregularly staying in a Member State other than the Member State which accepted to admit him or her in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Union Resettlement Framework Regulation] or which granted international protection or humanitarian status under a national resettlement scheme.
Amendment 1712 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The request shall state the reasons warranting an urgent reply and the period within which a reply is requested. That period shall be at least onetwo weeks.
Amendment 1717 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. The requested Member State shall make the necessary checks, and shall give a decision on the request to take charge of an applicant within onetwo months of receipt of the request.
Amendment 1721 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2. Notwithstanding the first paragraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 13 and 14a of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21(2) of Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, the requested Member State shall give a decision on the request within two weeksone month of receipt of the request.
Amendment 1729 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 7
Article 30 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting Member State has asked for an urgent reply pursuant to Article 29(2), the requested Member State shall reply within the period requested or, failing that, within at least two weeks of receipt of the request.
Amendment 1746 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. In a situation referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) the Member State where the person is present shall make a take back notification without delay and in any event within two weeksone month after receiving the Eurodac hit.
Amendment 1779 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1
Article 32 – paragraph 1
1. The determining Member State whose take charge request as regards the applicant referred to in Article 26(1), point (a) was accepted or who made a take back notification as regards persons referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d) shall take a transfer decision at the latest within onetwo weeks of the acceptance or notification.
Amendment 2361 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 2362 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 2378 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The share of solidarity contributions referred to in Article 45(1), points (a), (b) and (c) to be provided by each Member State in accordance with Articles 48 and 53 shall be calculated in accordance with the formula set out in Annex III and shall be based on the following criteria for each Member State, according to the latest available Eurostat data:ould take into account the actual efforts of the Member States in the field of asylum, migration and border management, their effectiveness in terms of returns, their external dimension actions, the overall capacity of their own systems and potential migratory pressure on their territory. The Member States whose burden of responsibility is greater should have the option of reducing their solidarity contribution.
Amendment 2382 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 2387 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2476 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 4
Article 57 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2496 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1
Where the checks confirm that there are reasonable grounds to consider the person concerned a danger to its national security or public order, the Member State of relocation shall inform within one weekmonth the benefitting Member State of the nature of and underlying elements for an alert from any relevant database. In such cases, relocation of the person concerned shall not take place.
Amendment 2522 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 4
Article 58 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2525 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 5
Article 58 – paragraph 5
Amendment 175 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The procedural rules set out in Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Management] for carrying out relocation and return sponsorship should be applied for the purpose of ensuring the proper implementation of the solidarity measures in a situation of crisis, although they should be adjusted in order to take into account the gravity and urgency of that situation. The concept of return sponsorship should include a precise definition of the roles of the country of entry, the sponsoring country and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. If this instrument is chosen, Member States must be allowed to indicate the nationality of third-country nationals required to return, taking into account their bilateral cooperation with the countries of origin on returns and readmission.
Amendment 424 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 450 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 5
Article 2 – paragraph 5
Amendment 460 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 6
Article 2 – paragraph 6
Amendment 465 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 7
Article 2 – paragraph 7
Amendment 619 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. In a crisis situation as referred to in Article 1(2)(a), and on the basis of an implementing act adopted by the Commission in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Article, Member States may suspend the examination of applications for international protection in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedures Regulation] and Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Qualification Regulation] in respect of displaced persons from third countries who are facing a high degree of risk of being subject to indiscriminate violence, in exceptional situations of armed conflict, and who are unable to return to their country of origin. In such a case, Member States shall grant immediate protection status to the persons concerned, unless they represent a danger to the national security or public order of the Member State, which may also revoke immediate protection in other justified cases, where return is considered viable. Such status shall be without prejudice to their ongoing application for international protection in the relevant Member State.
Amendment 625 #
2020/0277(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 17 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the effectiveness of return policy at EU level is not high, and a fall in the effectiveness of returns has even been noted;
Amendment 67 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Draws attention to the need to increase the transparency and speed of procedures for issuing return decisions, as this will make it more common for such decisions to be issued at the same time as or immediately after decisions to end legal residence, e.g. in the event of a negative asylum decision or the expiry of a visa or residence permit;
Amendment 74 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Recalls that return procedures are hampered by the failure of third-country nationals to cooperate, and that Member States themselves do not have sufficient tools to enable the competent authorities to swiftly exchange the necessary information in relation with return operations;
Amendment 117 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that the lack of consistent definitions and interpretations concerning the risk of absconding and the use of detention means, inter alia, that irregular migrants abscond or engage in secondary movements;
Amendment 182 #
2019/2208(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses the importance of an accelerated border procedure that would apply to persons whose asylum applications have been rejected in the course of asylum procedures at the border and would help to speed up the adoption and enforcement of return decisions at external borders;
Amendment 21 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the increase in the number of Dublin procedures in 2016- 2017 compared to 2014 is clearly linked to migrants who arrived in Europe during the crisis moving to their destination countries, which places a significant administrative burden on some Member States; points out that this results not only from the architecture of the Dublin system, but above all from differences in integration and social policy between Member States;
Amendment 76 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Amendment 83 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the Dublin system places a significant burden on a minority of Member States, in particular when influxes of migrants occur; takes the view that the EU therefore needs a solidarity mechanism which makes for fair sharing of burdens and responsibility among Member States, including through relocation on the basis of objective criteria of asylum seekers who are manifestly eligible for asylum;Notes that in connection with the mass influx of migrants, some Member States are facing a major administrative burden; recognises the difficult, global migration situation and considers that measures to address it should immediately be taken together with the entire international community; recalls, at the same time, that EU agencies such as Frontex and the EASO were set up precisely to balance the excessive burden on some Member States and support them in the implementation of the asylum and border acquis.
Amendment 96 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 100 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Stresses that taking responsibility for the EU's external borders is key to ensuring the safety of EU citizens;
Amendment 101 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Stresses that the principle of solidarity must be balanced with the principle of responsibility, and that reform of the Dublin system cannot be based on the automatic redistribution of applicants within the EU, as that would further increase pressure on national asylum systems and encourage illegal migration and human trafficking and smuggling; considers, too, that compulsory relocation is an ineffective instrument;
Amendment 102 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Considers a balanced and harmonised migration policy, including asylum, at European level to be necessary, but that it should be based on consensus and a balance of responsibility and solidarity, in line with the June 2018 European Council conclusions;
Amendment 105 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that ad hoc agreements are no substitute for a harmonised and sustainable policy at EU level; deplores the fact that efforts to overhaul the Dublin III Regulation have been blocked in the Councile importance of the Global Approach to Migration and Mobility, with the aim of establishing a framework for the external dimension of migration and asylum policy through enhanced cooperation between the EU and third countries on legal migration and mobility, combating trafficking in human beings, promoting international protection and extending the external dimension of EU asylum policy and the interaction between migration and development policies;
Amendment 111 #
2019/2206(INI)
2a. Stresses that solutions under the European Asylum System must guarantee an adequate level of security and should be based primarily on the principle of Member States' responsibility for national asylum systems; stresses, at the same time, the need for a comprehensive approach to migration, taking into account, among other things, the issue of returns;
Amendment 114 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 123 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Points out that according to a report by the European Court of Auditors, relocation in the period 2015-2017 was an expensive and ineffective solution; stresses that the compulsory distribution of migrants among Member States as part of the EU's migration policy is not a solution and that the relocation mechanism merely contributes to increasing migratory pressure and encourages migrants to try to reach the EU illegally with the help of human smugglers, and that they can often become victims of human trafficking, and in this context draws attention to the risk to human health and life;
Amendment 125 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. CRecalls onthat the Member States have the possibility to make use of the discretionary clause in Article 17 when exceptional circumstances so warrant, for example to relocate asylum seekers currently living in the Greek hotspots in an atmosphere of extreme tension and to provide decent reception conditions; stresses, however, that the discretionary clause should be treated as a clause enabling action to be taken in exceptional circumstances for people in genuine need of support, and not as a loophole in situations where there is no agreement in the EU on the relocation of migrants; recalls that, in accordance with the Dublin III Regulation, the reception of applicants under this clause remains voluntary;
Amendment 147 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Urges the introduction, in accordance with international law, of fast- track Dublinrapid asylum-related border procedures at the main points of irregular arrival in the EU, in European reception centres, in order to process asylum applications swiftly, assess their merits, determine the Member State responsible and, where appropriate, return asylum seekers without an unnecessarily prolonged detention period;
Amendment 156 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the significant operational backing for Dublinasylum procedures provided by the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) in the hotspots; calls on the Commission and the Member States to facilitate the work of EASO staff by allowing interviews in a language other than that of the country in which they are conducted; calls for the establishment of a European Asylum Agency, with sufficient financial and human resources;
Amendment 185 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that the right to asylum should be about providing safe protection and basic services, not about independently choosing the best place to live; the external borders should therefore be protected even more effectively and procedures should be introduced to ensure that foreign nationals who require protection are differentiated as quickly as possible from those who only plan to use asylum procedures to enter the EU and move to other Member States and who should be returned immediately to their countries of origin or transit;
Amendment 216 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that in some cases the rules onRecalls that transfer ofring responsibility under Dublin III undermine the efficiency of asylum procedures and the carrying-out of transfers and contribute to the increase in the number of secondary movements by encouraging asylum-seekers to remain outside the system; calls on the Commission to revise the rules, in order to give Member States sufficient time to carry out transfers and do away with transfer of responsibility in cases where an asylum seeker abscondsin cases where the deadline for transfer is not met should encourage Member States to carry out transfers as quickly and efficiently as possible; considers that the time limits currently in force are sufficient;
Amendment 226 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Considers that providing asylum seekers with legal assistance in connection with Dublin procedures, in particular in the hotspots, would simplify the process of obtaining asylum and improve decision- making; calls on the Member States to improve the information made available to asylum seekers on the complex Dublin procedures, to ensure that it is clear and accessible to everyone; stresses the importance of solutions to prevent the submission of multiple applications for international protection;
Amendment 238 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses that the principle of a single asylum application in the EU is consistently flouted, a state of affairs at odds with the very purpose of the Dublin III Regulation; considers that the competent national authorities should share their relevant information on a European database such as Eurodac, in order to speed up procedures and prevent multiple asylum applications, while protecting personal data; considers that registering in the Eurodac system all applicants and illegal migrants crossing the borders is a priority;
Amendment 257 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that closer cooperation between national asylum authorities is needed,the coordination of cooperation within a strong Dublin network, the exchange of in forder to share informationmation at Dublin Committee meetings and streamline transfers; proposesaining organised regularly by thate EASO be given the task of drawing up enhanced governance arrangements for the application of the Dublin III Regulation, including a monthly operational dialogue between national authorities, and a platform for the exchange and sharingprovide effective support to experts in the proper implementation of the Regulation and foster the development of uninformation and best practices EU-wide;
Amendment 274 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. PropoStresses that EASO be given an expanded rolee need to develop cooperation between the EASO, Frontex, Europol, eu-LISA agencies in analysing the flows of and pathways taken by asylum seekers, in order to better anticipate and understand pressures on asylum systems;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2094(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the Office of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications discharge in respect of the implementation of the Office’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2093(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2092(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Securities and Markets Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Securities and Markets Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Authority for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2090(DEC)
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Banking Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Banking Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Authority for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2088(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) discharge in respect of the implementation of Europol’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2087(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director-General of the Euratom Supply Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director-General of the Euratom Supply Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2086(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Chemicals Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Chemicals Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2084(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European GNSS Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European GNSS Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2083(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Agency for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2081(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Railways discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Railways discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2080(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2079(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Centre for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2077(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Union Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Union Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2076(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2074(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Administrative Director of the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) discharge in respect of the implementation of Eurojust’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Administrative Director of the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Eurojust’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2073(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Medicines Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018/ Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Medicines Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2071(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2070(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Agency for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 3 #
2019/2069(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Centre for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2067(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 2 #
2019/2066(DEC)
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants the Executive Director of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2018 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2018;
Amendment 1 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the overall reduction of AMIF commitment appropriations by 15,4 % (-172 million euros) compared to 2019; regretnotes the decrease of commitment appropriations aimed at strengthening and developing the CEAS and enhancing responsibility-sharing between Member States (-29,5 %) compared to 2019; recalls the importance of providing adequate financial capacity to improve the integration of migrants as well as re- integration of migrants who forcibly or voluntarily returned to a third country, and to respond to emergency assistance needs of Member States under migratory pressure; expresses its disappointment at the fact that the AMIF budget does not include some financial reserves to finance the reformed Dublin legislation and the new Union Resettlement schemes in case of adoption during 2020; proposes to foresee an amount in the reserve for temporary arrangements for disembarkation in the Union and relocation of people rescued in the Mediterranean; requests, in order to free financial resources, that the EU Trust Fund for Africa and the Regional development protection programmes for North Africa that primarily support external policies of the Union are funded by Heading IV of the Union budget (Global Europe) instead of by AMIF under Heading III (Security and Citizenship)compared to 2019;
Amendment 23 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses the necessity to solve the migration crisis at its source and to protect the Union's external borders; in this context particularly welcomes the increases of Commitment appropriations of EBCG.
Amendment 34 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 411 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) being subject of a return decision issued by another Member State; , if consent for transit has not been given pursuant to Article 9(5)
Amendment 543 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. 5 If a return decision sets a deadline for voluntary departure and provided that the third-country national to whom that decision pertains does not constitute a threat to public order or public security or to the national security of the Member States, he or she may, within that deadline and for the sole purpose of enforcing that decision, transit through the territory of a Member State other than the one which issued the decision. Member States may require such transit to be subject to their prior consent. Member States shall inform the Commission and each other of the introduction or withdrawal of the obligation to obtain their prior consent for the transit of a third-country national through their territories.
Amendment 545 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. 5. If a third-country national is found on the territory of a Member State: (a) in respect of whom a return decision has been issued by another Member State without a time limit for voluntary departure, (b) who, despite being covered by a return decision issued by another Member State which sets a deadline for voluntary departure, has not obtained consent to transit through the territory of that Member State, if such consent was required, (c) who is considered a threat to public order or public security or to the national security of that Member State then that Member State may either apply the procedure laid down in Council Directive 2001/40/EC or return the third- country national concerned to the Member State that issued the decision.
Amendment 561 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Member States may decide that any costs they incur in connection with an expulsion shall be reimbursed by the third-country national concerned by the return decision or by any other person or entity responsible for the third-country national’s stay or employment in their territory.
Amendment 597 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall consider withdrawing or suspending an entry ban where a third- country national who is the subject of an entry ban issued in accordance with paragraph 1, second subparagraph, can demonstrate that he or she has left the territory of a Member State in full compliance with a return decision. Member States shall make the withdrawal or suspension of an entry ban conditional upon the third-country national or other person or liable entity paying the charges arising from the decision, taken in accordance with Article 10(7), to establish the costs related to the expulsion of that third-country national. In such a case, the entry ban shall not be withdrawn or suspended until the third-country national or other person or liable entity has paid those charges. If the charges have not been paid by the end of the period of the entry ban, that period shall be extended until the date on which those charges become time-barred under national law.
Amendment 652 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall establish reasonablea time limit not exceeding five (5) days and other necessary rules to ensure the exercise of the right to an effective remedy pursuant to this Article.
Amendment 702 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. 7. Member States may detain a third-country national for a second time despite having made use of the period provided for in paragraph 6 if, after his or her release from detention, circumstances arise which make it possible to enforce a return decision previously issued in relation to that third-country national. The new period of detention shall not exceed 30 days.
Amendment 744 #
2018/0329(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. Return decisions issued in return procedures carried out in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article shallmay be given by means of a standard form as set out under national legislation, in accordance with Article 15(3).
Amendment 374 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Where conflicting obligations exist, the court should determine whether the conflicting provisions of the third country prohibit disclosure of the data concerned on the grounds that this is necessary to either protect the fundamental rights of the individuals concerned or the fundamental interests of the third country related to national security or defence. In carrying out this assessment, the court should take into account whether the third country law, rather than being intended to protect fundamental rights or fundamental interests of the third country related to national security or defence, manifestly seeks to protect other interests or is being aimed to shield illegal activities from law enforcement requests in the context of criminal investigations. Where the court concludes that conflicting provisions of the third country prohibit disclosure of the data concerned on the grounds that this is necessary to either protect the fundamental rights of the individuals concerned or the fundamental interests of the third country related to national security or defence, it should consult the third country via its central authorities, which are already in place for mutual legal assistance purposes in most parts of the world. It should set a deadline for the third country to raise objections to the execution of the European Production Order; in case the third country authorities do not respond within the (extended) deadline despite a reminder informing them of the consequences of not providing a response, the court upholds the Order. If the third country authorities object to disclosure, the court should lift the Order.
Amendment 396 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down the rules under which an authority of a Member State may order a service provider offering services in the Union, to produce or preserve electronic evidenceinformation that may serve as evidence in criminal proceedings, regardless of the location of data. This Regulation is without prejudice to the powers of national authorities to compel service providers established or represented on their territory to comply with similar national measures.
Amendment 410 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
(c) services related to the provision of internet domain name and IP numbering services such as IP address providers, domain name registries, domain name registrars and related privacy and proxy services;
Amendment 411 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c
(c) services related to the provision of internet domain name and IP numbering services such as IP address providers, domain name registries, domain name registrars and relatedor privacy and proxy services;
Amendment 422 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
(5) ‘establishment’ means either the actual pursuit of an economic activity for an indefinite period through a stable infrastructure from where the business of providingprovision of services is carried out or a stable infrastructure from where the business is managed;the place of the business' central administration.
Amendment 426 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘electronic evidenceinformation’ means evidence data stored in electronic form by or on behalf of a service provider at the time of receipt of a production or preservation order certificate, consisting in stored subscriber data, access data, transactional data and content data; that might serve as evidence during the investigation, prosecution and legal proceedings regarding a criminal offence in a Member State in accordance with national law;
Amendment 434 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b
(b) the type of service and itsthe duration including technical dataof the subscription including other relevant suscription-related information and data identifying related technical measures or interfaces used by or provided to the subscriber or customer, and data related to the validation of the use of service, excluding passwords or other authentication means used in lieu of a password that are provided by a user, or created at the request of a user;
Amendment 436 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8
(8) ‘access data’ means data related to the commencement and termination of atechnical identifiers related to a specific user access session to a service, which is strictly necessary for the sole purpose of identifying the user of the service, such assuch as the user ID, the date and time of use, or the log-in to and log-off from the service, together with the IP address allocated by the internet access service provider to the user of a service, dataor the IP address; such data are deemed necessary for the sole purpose of identifying the interfacuser of the used and the user ID. This includesrvice and do not allow profiling an individual; electronic communications metadata as defined in point (g) of Article 4(3) of [Regulation concerning the respect for private life and the protection of personal data in electronic communications] are also included;
Amendment 443 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
(9) ‘transactional data’ means data related to the provision of a service offered by a service provider that serves to provide context or additional information about such service and is generated or processed by an information system of the service provider, such as the source and destination of a message or another type of interaction, data on the location of the device, date, time, duration, size, route, format, the protocol used and the type of compression, unless such data constitutes access data. This includes electronic communications metadata as defined in point (g) of Article 4(3) of [Regulation concerning the respect for private life and the protection of personal data in electronic communications];
Amendment 448 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘content data’ means any stored data related to the services provided by service providers in a digital format such as text, voice, videos, images, and sound other than subscriber, access or transactional data;
Amendment 738 #
2018/0108(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. Suspects and accused pPersons whose data was obtained via a European Production Order or European Preservation Order shall have the right to effective remedies against the European Produrespectionve Order during the criminal proceedings for which the Order was issued,issuing state without prejudice to remedies available under Directive (EU) 2016/680 and Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 15 #
2018/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – introductory part
(2) ‘service provider’ means any natural or legal person that provides one or morat least one of the following categories of services:
Amendment 21 #
2018/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘establishment’ means either the actual pursuit of an economic activity for an indefinite period through a stable infrastructure from where the business of providingprovision of services is carried out or a stable infrastructure from where the business is managedthe place of the business' central administration;
Amendment 6 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15
Citation 15
Amendment 8 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16
Citation 16
Amendment 18 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Union is founded on the values 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, as set outlaid down in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and as reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and embedded in international human rights treaties;
Amendment 22 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in contrast to Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the scope the scope of application of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union is not lidetermitned to the obligations under the Treaties, as indicated in the Commission Communication of 15 October 2003, and whereas the Union can assess the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under Member States’ competencesby the scope of the Commission proposal and, in the absence of an extension of the scope of the proposal, Parliament cannot arbitrarily determine the area covered by the procedure;
Amendment 23 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the procedure under Article 7 TEU has its limits set by the reasoned proposal submitted by the Commission, and any matters not covered by it cannot be subject to the European Parliament’s consent procedure;
Amendment 26 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. Points out that the European Parliament’s role in the consent procedure is described in Article 7 and cannot be otherwise usurped; recalls that, according to Article 269 TFEU, only procedural matters can be challenged before the CJEU under Article 7 TEU;
Amendment 28 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 3
Paragraph 1 – indent 3
Amendment 32 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 33 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates its position, expressed in several of its resolutions on the situation of the rule of law and democracy in Poland, that the facts and trends mentioned in this resolution taken together represent a systemic threat to the valuesConfirms that an assessment of a possible breach of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) anshould constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereofly be made once the reform process in the areas concerned has been completed;
Amendment 34 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)
(1) Takes note of the explanations provided by the Polish government as regards the reasons for the introduction of the reform of the judiciary and considers these explanations to be legitimate and convincing in the context of the concerns expressed by Member States;
Amendment 37 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. ExpStresses its deep concern tthat the Polish Government hats, despite three hearings of Poland having been held in the Council, alarming reports by the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe,pursuant to Article 7, thoroughly and repeatedly explained the reasons behind the reform of the judiciary in Poland and four infringements procedures launched by the Commission, the rule of law situation in Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEUtlined its basic principles welcomes the fact that the presentations were comprehensive, addressing all concerns and questions raised by Member States and the European Commission;
Amendment 40 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 43 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 47 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the latest developments in the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU once again underline the imminent need for a complementary and preventive Union mecNotes that the Council has so far not identified a risk of serious breach by Poland of the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU; emphansism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights as put forward by Parliament in its resolutes that the Council is the only EU institution with such a competence under the provisions of 25 October 2016Article 7(1) TEU;
Amendment 49 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)
Amendment 52 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates its position on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, including the need to safeguard the rights of beneficiaries, and calls on the Council to start interinstitutional negotiations as soon as possible;Stresses that the conditionality of the disbursement of EU funds must be based on objective and measurable criteria; notes that any non-economic and political criteria create a flagrant risk of their instrumentalisation and introduce uncertainty for the beneficiaries of EU funds; recalls Opinion No 1/2018 of the European Court of Auditors, which expressly draws attention to the above- mentioned element and to the risk of loss of funding by the beneficiaries of funds.
Amendment 55 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Amendment 56 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
Amendment 57 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
Amendment 58 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 59 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 61 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Subheading 3
Amendment 62 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 65 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 67 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Denounces that, during the COVID-19 outbreak, but not linked with the COVID-19 outbreak, legislation is being debated or even rushed through in Parliament in very sensitive areas such as abortion, sexual education, the organisation of elections or the term of office of the President, the latter even requiring a change to the Constitution; underlines that this could amount to abuse of the fact that citizens cannot organise or protest publicly, which would seriously undermine the legitimacy of the legislation adoptedStresses that the proposal concerning abortion is a citizens’ initiative, and not a government one, and was submitted on 30 November 2017 by a group of at least 100 000 entitled persons and initiated by the ‘Stop Abortion’ Legislative Initiative Committee; recalls that, in accordance with the regulations in force, the project was submitted for parliamentary action and has been on the agenda for over two-and-a-half years;
Amendment 69 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Recalls that the Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 December 2013 on sexual and reproductive health and rights (2013/2040(INI)) ‘notes that the formulation and implementation of policies on SRHR and on sexual education in schools is a competence of the Member States’;
Amendment 70 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
Amendment 71 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 75 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 79 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 87 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recognises that the organisation of the justice system is a national competence; reiterates that, all the same, national judges are essentially also European judges, applying Union law, which is the reason whylst the Union, including the CJEU, has to watch overno competence to speak out regarding the independence of the judiciary in all the Member States as one of the exigencies of the rule of law and as laid down in Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter;
Amendment 89 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. RecallConsiders that the acts concerningssessment of the legal nature of the Constitutional Tribunal adopted on 22 December’s statements of 9 March 20156 and 22 July 2016 seriously affected11 August 2016 on the Cunconstitutional Tribunal’s independence and legitimacy and were therefore declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Tribunal on respectively 9 March 2016 and 11 August 2016; recalls that those judgments were not published at the time nor implemented by the Polish authorities; seriously deplores the lack of independent and effectivity of the laws concerning the Constitutional Tribunal remain outside the Union’s competence and that, in the light of subsequent legislative developments and the case-law of the cConstitutional review in Poland25; invites the CommissionTribunal, these statements are of historical value, making it superfluous to consider launching an infringement procedure in relation to the legislationspect onf the Constitutional Tribunal; _________________ 25Venice Commission Opinion of 14-15 October 2016, para. 128; UN, Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 31 October 2016, paras 7-8; Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520.provisions concerning the Constitutional Tribunal;
Amendment 92 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that, already in 2017,ognises that the changes in the method of nomination of candidates to the position of the First President of the Supreme Court deprivedtake into account the participation of the Supreme Court judges in the selection procedure of any meaningful effect and put the decision in the hands of the President of the Republic; denounces that recent amendments to the act on the Supreme Court even further reduce the participation of the judges in the process of selection of the First Presiden, while the role of the President of the Republic of Poland in this procedure is consistent with the principle of governmental checks and balances; recognises that the introduction of the post of the Supreme Court by introducing a position of First President ad interim appointed by the President of the Republic and by reducing the quorum in the third round to 32 out of 120 judges only, thereby effectively abandoning the model of power-sharing between thejudge ad interim holding the office of First President of the Supreme Court is a systemic solution aimed at ensuring the effective conduct of the election of the First President andof the judicial community enshrined in Article 183(3) of the Polish Constitution26; _________________ 26Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, CDL-PI(2020)002, paras 51-55.Supreme Court without undue delay;
Amendment 98 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Shares the Commission’s concernRecognises that the powers of the President of the Republic (and in some cases also the Minister of Justice) to exercise influence over disciplinary proceedings against Supreme Court judges by appointing a disciplinary officer who will investigate the case, excluding the disciplinary officer of the Supreme Court from an on-going proceeding, risks to run counter to the principle of separation of powers and may affect judicial independence27; _________________ 27See Commission Reasoned Proposal of 20 December 2017, COM(2017) 835, para. 133. See also OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion on Certain Provisions of the Draft Act on the Supreme Court of Poland (as of 26 September 2017), 13 November 2017, p. 33.of Poland to appoint a disciplinary officer in disciplinary proceedings against Supreme Court judges are part of the mechanism of governmental checks and balances;
Amendment 99 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. RecallNotes that the CJEU found in its judgment of 24 June 201928that lowering the retirement age of sitting judgesPolish authorities have adopted an amendment to the act ofn the Supreme Court is contrary to Union law and breaches the principle of the irremovability of judges and thus that of judicial independence, after it had earlier granted the Commission’s request for interim measures on the matter by order of 17 December 201829; notes thatn order to comply with the CJEU’s order, which is seen as evidence of the willingness of the Polish authorities passed an ameto cooperate andm ent to the act on the Supreme Court in order to comply with the CJEU’s Order, the only instance so far in which they undid a reform of the justice system following a decision by the CJEU; _________________ 28Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 June 2019, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:531. 29Order of the Court of Justice of 17 December 2018, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18 R, ECLI:EU:C:2018:1021.gage in dialogue with the EU bodies, including in the reform of the judiciary following the CJEU ruling, although this area remains an exclusive competence of the Member States;
Amendment 101 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls that, in 2017, two new chambers within the Supreme CPoints ourt were created, namely the Disciplinary Chamber and the Extraordinary Chamber, which were staffed with newly appointed judges selected by the new NCJthat the organisation and enstrusted with special powers – including the power of the Extraordinary Chamber to quash final judgments taken by lower courts or by the Supreme Court itself by way of extraordinary review, and the power of the Disciplinary Chamber to discipline other (Supreme Court) judges, creating de facto a “Supreme Court within the Supreme Court”;30 ; _________________ 30 OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion of 13 November 2017, p. 7-20; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, para. 43; Recommendation (EU) 2018/103, para. 25; GRECO, Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 18-22 June 2018, para. 31; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 8.cture of the judicial system falls under the sole responsibility of the Member States;
Amendment 104 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 105 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Notes that the referring Supreme Court (Labour Chamber) subsequently concluded in its judgment of 5 December 2019 that the Disciplinary Chamber does not fulfil the requirements of an independent and impartiConstitutional tTribunal, and that the Supreme Court (Civil, Criminal and Labour Chambers) adopted a resolution on 23 January 2020 reiterating that the Disciplinary Chamber is not a court due to its lack of independence and therefore its decisions shall be considered null and void; notes with grave concern that the Polish authorities have declared that those decisions are of no legal significance when it comes to the continuing functioning of the Disciplinary Chamber and the NCJ, and that the Constitutional Tribunal has ‘suspended’ the resolution of 23 January 2020, creating a judgment has clarified the controversy over the Supreme Court Disciplinary Chamber and averted the dangerous of judiciaryl duality in Poland and moreover openly defying the primacy of Union law and the status granted to the CJEU by Article 19(1) TEU32; _________________ 32Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 38.;
Amendment 108 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Takes note of the order of the CJEU of 8 April 202033[1] instructing the Poland to immediately suspend the application of the national provisions on the powers of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and calls on; takes note of the information provided by the Polish authorities to swifton the timely implementation of the judgment; calls on the Commission to urgently start infringement proceedings in relation to the national provisions on within the deadline in connection with the powOrders of the Extraordinary Chamber, since its composition suffers from the same flaws as the Disciplinary Chamber; _________________ 33Acting First President of the Supreme Court No. 55/2020 on the execution of the CJEU ruling; Order of the Court of Justice of 8 April 2020, Commission v Poland, C-791/19 R, ECLI:EU:C:2020:277.
Amendment 109 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recalls that it is up to the Member States to establish a council for the judiciary, butand that, where such council is established, its independence must bein Poland is guaranteed in line with European standards and the constitution; recallognises that, following the 2017-2018 reform of the NCJ, the body responsible for safeguarding the independence of the courtsjudiciary and judges in accordance with Article 186(1) of the Polish Constitution, the judicial community in Poland lost the powerdid not lose its right to delegate representatives to the NCJ, and hence its influence on recruitment and promotion of judges; recalls that before the 2017 reform, 15 out of 25 members of the NCJ were judges elected by their peers, while since the 2017 reform, those judges are elected by the Polish Sejm; strongly regrets that, taken in conjunction with the immediate replacement in early 2018 of all the members appointed under the old rules, this measure between 2017 and 2018, and thus is abled to a far-reaching politicisation of the NCJ34; _________________ 34Consultative Council of European Judges, Opinions of the Bureau of 7 April 2017 and 12 October 2017; OSCE/ODIHR, Final Opinion on Draft Amendments to the Act of the NCJ, 5 May 2017; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, p. 5-7; GRECO, Ad hoc Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 19-23 March 2018 and Addendum of 18-22 June 2018; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 42 and 61.influence the recruitment and promotion of judges;
Amendment 111 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
Amendment 113 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 117 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. CDoes not see sufficient grounds to calls on the Commission to start infringement proceedings against the act of 12 May 2011 on the NCJ and to ask the CJEU to suspend the activities of the new NCJ by way of interim measures;
Amendment 120 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Regretcognises that the Minister of Justice, who is, in the Polish system, is also the Prosecutor General, obtained the power to appoint and dismiss court presidents of the lower courts at his discretion during a transitional period of six months, and that in 2017-2018 the Minister of Justice replaced over a hundred court presidein accordance with the principle of Member States’ sovereignty over the organisation of the judiciary, has been given the power to appoints and vice-presidents; notes that, after this period, removal of court presidents remaineddismiss court presidents of the lower courts, as ins the hands of thcase Minister of Justice, with virtually no effective checks attached to this power; notes, furthermore, that the Minister of Justice also obtained other many other Member States; recognises that the Minister of Justice in Poland, as in other Member States, has “disciplinary” powers vis-à-visover court presidents, and presidents of higher courts, who in turn, now have large administrative powers vis-à-visover presidents of lower courts36; regrets this major setback for the rule of law and judicial independence in Poland37; _________________ 36Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 45. 37See also Council of Europe, Bureau of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE-BU), CCJE- BU(2018)6REV, 18 June 2018.;
Amendment 122 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Regrets thatcognises that the Polish authorities, by way of the act of 20 December 2019 amending the act on the common courts and certain other acts that entered into force on 14 February 2020, were able, in accordance with the principle of the sovereignty of Member States in terms of the organisation of the judiciary, to changed the composition of the assemblies of judges and moved some of the powers of those bodies of judicial self- government to the colleges of courts presidents appointed by the Minister of Justice38; _________________ 38Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 46 to 50.;
Amendment 124 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Denounces the new provisions introducing further disciplinary offences and sanctions in respect of judges and court presidents, as they pose serious risk to judicial independence39; denounces the new provisAcknowledges the relevance of new legislations prohibiting anyll political activityies of judges, obliging judgesthem to disclose publicly their membership in associations and restricting substantively the deliberations of judicial self-governing bodies, which go beyond the principles of legal certainty, necessity and proportionality in restricting the judges’ freedom of expression40; _________________ 39OSCE/ODIHR, Urgent Interim Opinion on the Bill Amending the Act on the Organization of Common Courts, the Act on the Supreme Court and Certain Other Acts of Poland (as of 20 December 2019), 14 January 2020, p. 23-26; Venice Commission and DGI ofin order to strengthen the effective separation of powers and ensure the Cofuncil of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 44-45. 40OSCE/ODIHR, Urgent Interim Opinion, 14 January 2020, p. 18-21; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 24-30tioning of apolitical and impartial courts;
Amendment 127 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Polish authorities to remove the new provisions (on disciplinary offences and other) that prevent the courts from examining questions of independence and impartiality of other judges from the standpoint of Union law and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), hence depriving judges from exercising their duties under Union law to put aside national provisions conflicting with Union law41; _________________ 41OSCE/ODIHR, Urgent Interim Opinion, 14 January 2020, p. 13-17; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 31-43.Recognises, in the light of the explanations provided by the Polish authorities aimed at ensuring the functioning of a judicial system characterised by stability and integrity, the legitimacy of introducing provisions that prevent the courts from examining questions of independence and impartiality of other judges;
Amendment 129 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the Commission’s initiation ofDoes not see, in the light of the explanations provided by the Polish authorities and the findings of the present proceedings, any grounds for the Commission to initiate infringement proceedings in relation to the aforementioned new provisions; calls on the Commission to request the CJEU to use the expedited procedure and to grant interim measures, when it comes to a referral of the case to the CJEU;
Amendment 131 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. DenouncesRecognises that the merger of the office of the Minister of Justice and that of the Public Prosecutor General, the increased powers of the Public Prosecutor General vis-à-vis the prosecution system, and the increased powers of the Minister of Justice in respect of the judiciary (act of 27 July 2001 on the organisation of common courts) and the weak position of checks to these powers (National Council of Public Prosecutors), which result in the accumulation of too many powers for one person and have direct negative consequences for the independence of the prosecutorial system from the political sphere, as stated by the Venice Commission42; _________________ 42Venice Commission Opinion of 8-9 December 2017 on the Act on the Public Prosecutor’s office, as amended, CDL- AD(2017)028, para. 115.fall under the sole competence of the Member States as regards the organisation and structure of the judiciary:
Amendment 135 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Concurs with the Commission, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Group of States against Corruption thatIn the light of the explanations provided by the Polish authorities and the findings made in the course of this procedure, the aforebove-mentioned separate reforms to the judicial system, consideringgiven their interactionale and overall impact, amount topurpose, do not constitute a serious, sustainedpersistent and systemic breach of the rule of law, enabling the legislative and executive powers to influence the functioning and make it possible to strengthen the principle of tche judiciary in a critical manner, thereby significantly weakening the independence of the judiciary in Poland43; _________________ 43Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; GRECO, Follow-up to the Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report (rule 34) – Poland, 6 December 2019, para. 65; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 4.cks and balances between the legislative, executive and judicial authorities by jointly shaping the judicial system in Poland;
Amendment 136 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 15
Subheading 15
Amendment 137 #
Amendment 138 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
Amendment 141 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 145 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 17
Subheading 17
Amendment 149 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 152 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
Amendment 159 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
Amendment 161 #
Amendment 162 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 165 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates its call on the Polish government to respect the right of freedom of assembly by removing from the current act of 24 July 2015 on public assemblies, as amended on 13 December 2016, the provisions prioritising government-approved ‘cyclical’ assemblies48; urges the authorities to refrain from applying criminal sanctions to people whocalls that on 2 April 2017, an amendment to the act on public assemblies came into force, with Article 12(1) of the act being amended through the introduction of a rule stipulating that different assemblies may not be held within 100 metres of each other, thus the amendment reduces the likelihood of threat to the safety of participatents in peacefulconcurrent assemblies or counter-demonstrations and to drop criminal charges against peaceful protesters; _________________ 48 See as weby increasing the distance between them, while their participants are able to express their opinions; recalls the Commuat persons or organicsation of 23 April 2018 by UN Expertss have the right to uorge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talksanise assemblies once the formal requirements set out in the act of 24 July 2015 have been met.
Amendment 166 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates its call on the Polish government to respect the right of freedom of assembly by removing from the current act of 24 July 2015 on public assemblies, as amended on 13 December 2016, the provisions prioritising government-approved ‘cyclical’ assemblies48; urges the authorities to refrain from applying criminal sanctions to people whocalls that persons or organisations shall have the right to organise assemblies after meeting the formal requirements set out in the act of 24 July 2015, and that police officers shall take action only against persons who violate the prevailing legal order, first of all by trying to separate them from participatents in peaceful assemblies or counter-demonstrations and to drop crimithe assembly who are peacefully demonstrating their views; recalls, furthermore, that the Constitutional Tribunal charges against peaceful protesters; _________________ 48 See as well the Communication of 23 April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talks.s pointed out that the introduction of the institution of cyclical assemblies is an additional and new way of defining the legal framework for the exercise of freedom of assembly;
Amendment 167 #
Amendment 168 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 170 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Calls on the Polish authorities to modify the act of 15 September 2017 on the National Institute for Freedom - Centre for the Development of Civil Society49, in order to ensure access to state funding for critical civil society groups, and a fair, impartial and transparent distribution of public funds to civil society, ensuring pluralStresses that, within the framework of existing legislation, the fair, impartial and transparent distribution of public funds is fully ensured, and that the procedure for allocating funds is also regulated by the act on the National Freedom Institute; notes that, in accordance with the procedure, each application for funding is assessed by two external experts, and that all conditions of each open competition are the subject of public consultations with non- governmental organisatic representation; _________________ 49OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the Draft Act of Poland on the National Freedom Institute - Centre for thons and are also approved by the Council of the National Freedom Institute before each open competition is announced; stresses that all NGOs and NGO coalitions have the right to submit their comments and amendments to the chart; points out that the eligibility criteria are pluralistic and include Development of Civil Society, Warsaw, 22 August 2017.ryone, and that all civil society groups and NGOs that meet the definition set out in Article 3 of the act on public benefit and volunteerism can apply for grants;
Amendment 172 #
Amendment 173 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 174 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Reiterates its conclusion set out in its resolution of 14 September 2016 that the procedural safeguards and material conditions laid down in the act of 10 June 2016 on anti-terrorist actions and the act of 6 April 1990 on the police for the implementation of secret surveillance are not sufficient to prevent its excessive use or unjustified interference with the privacy and data protection of individuals, including of opposition and civil society leaders50; repeats its call on the Commission to carry out an assessment of that legislation as regards its compatibility with Union Law, and urges Polish authorities to fully respect the privacy of all citizens; _________________ 50UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, paras 39-40. See as well Communication by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talks, 23 April 2018.Stresses that the act of 10 June 2016 on counter-terrorist activities provides a legal basis for systemic solutions adopted in Poland in the field of counter-terrorist activities, and the provisions contained therein are aimed, inter alia, at enabling the authorities and other entities to take effective and proportionate action against terrorist threats; points out, therefore, that the provisions adopted in this act concerning the possibilities of carrying out operational monitoring refer only to a person who is suspected of being likely to engage in terrorist activity and who is not a Polish citizen; stresses, moreover, that in Poland the processing of information by the authorities, including personal data, is carried out in accordance with the principles set out in the provisions of the act of 14 December 2018 on the protection of personal data processed in connection with preventing and combating crime and the act of 5 August 2010 on the protection of classified information, as well as in the rules governing the individual authorities; points out that the rules laid down in the aforementioned acts are in line with the standards of EU law established in this matter, including Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the competent authorities for the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences, the free movement of such data and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA; states that, pursuant to Article 20 of the acts of 4 April 1990 on police, the police have the right to process information, including personal data, in accordance with their statutory tasks and subject to regulatory restrictions; points out that operational monitoring (covert surveillance) may take place only with the consent of the court, provided that it aims to detect and identify the perpetrators, as well as to obtain and consolidate evidence seized by public prosecution, of intentional crimes set out in Article 19(1), points 1-9 of this act, and provided that other measures have proved ineffective or will not be useful; points out that the act allows that in urgent cases, if this could result in the loss of information or the obliteration or destruction of evidence of a crime, the police, with the written consent of the competent prosecutor, may exercise this right without the consent of the court; notes that they are nevertheless obliged to apply to the court at the same time for the issuance of an appropriate provision to that effect; points out that if the court does not give its consent within five days from the date of the operational control order, it shall be suspended and the materials collected during the control shall be recorded in the minutes, provided that their destruction is recorded; notes that the principle being applied is one of judicial and prosecutorial review;
Amendment 176 #
Amendment 179 #
Amendment 181 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 184 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Reiterates its deep concern expressed in its resolution of 14 November 2019, also shared by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights51, overStresses that the draft law amending Article 200b of the Polish Penal Code, submitted to the Sejm by the ‘Stop Paedophilia’ initiative, for its extremely vague, broad and disproportionate provisions, which de facto seeks to criminalise the dissemination of sexual education to minors and whose scope potentially threatens all persons, in particular parents, teachers and sex educators, with up to three years in prison for teaching about human sexuality, health and intimate relations; stresses the importance of health and sexual education; _________________ 51Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Statement of 14 April 2020.ment to the Penal Code was drawn up by the citizens’ initiative ‘Stop Paedophilia’ and refers to the criminalisation of the promotion of paedophilic behaviour; emphasises that this does not constitute the criminalisation of education, but a ban on promoting paedophilia;
Amendment 188 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)
Paragraph 42 a (new)
42a. Recalls that, in accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Union must fully respect the ‘responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the organisation of education systems’ and, at the same time, has the task of supporting, complementing and coordinating the development of education;
Amendment 189 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 22
Subheading 22
Amendment 192 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 22
Subheading 22
Amendment 194 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
Amendment 201 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Recalls that Parliament has strongly criticised, already in its resoluStresses that the draft amendment to the act of 7 January 1993 on family planning, protections of 14 September 2016 and 15 November 2017, any legislative proposal that would prohibit abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52; _________________ 52See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.the human foetus and the conditions of admissibility for the termination of pregnancy, which is being negotiated in the Polish Parliament, is a citizens’ initiative that is being negotiated in accordance with the applicable legal provisions; notes, however, that the Government of the Republic of Poland is not working on an amendment to the act on access to abortion;
Amendment 205 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 208 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Recalls that previous attempts to further limit the right to abortion, which in Poland is already among the most restricted in the Union, were halted in 2016 and 2018 as a result of mass opposition from Polish citizens as expressed in the ‘Black Marches’; calls for the law limiting women’s and girls’ access to the emergency contraceptive pill to be repealedinternational law does not recognise the so-called right to abortion and no binding treaty recognises such a right, and that the European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly stressed that the right to private life cannot be interpreted as consenting to the so-called right to abortion; recalls that such a right cannot, furthermore, be considered to emerge as an international custom, since in the vast majority of countries which allow access to abortion, such access constitutes immunity from criminal proceedings and is not defined as a right;
Amendment 211 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 23
Subheading 23
Amendment 213 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 215 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Reiterates its call onStresses that the Polish gGovernment to take appropriate action on and strongly condemn any xenophobic and fascist hate crime or hate speech53; _________________ 53EP Resolution of 15 November 2017, para. 18; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 14; UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concludconducts monitoring of crimes motivated by prejudice, and the scope of this monitoring includes information about preparatory proceedings for hate crimes conducted (by the police) throughout the country; points out that hate crimes, due to their high social harmfulness, are included in the Priorities of the Police Commander in Chief; notes that educational activities are also conducted ing observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, CCPR/C/POL/CO/7, paras 15-18.rder to provide police officers with the knowledge and skills necessary to prevent and combat hate crimes;
Amendment 218 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45a. Welcomes the actions of Polish authorities condemning xenophobic and fascist hate crime or hate speech and calls on Polish authorities to further taking of appropriate actions in this regard;
Amendment 220 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 b (new)
Paragraph 45 b (new)
45b. Recalls that the Constitution of the Republic of Poland confirms the prohibition of discrimination against anyone on any grounds;
Amendment 222 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
Amendment 226 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’iterates its call that discrimination against LGBTI people by persons performing public functions, including hate speech and violation of personal rights should be denounced, and calleds on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination;
Amendment 236 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. NotRecognises that the lackissue of independence of the judiciary in Poland hais already started affectingn area under the exclusive competence of that Member State and cannot constitute grounds for mutual mistrust between Poland and other Member States, especiallyincluding in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters; points out that mutual trust between the Member States can be restored only once respect for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured;
Amendment 240 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Calls onAffirms that the Polish gGovernment tois complying with all provisions relating to the rule of law and fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and international human rights standards, and tohat it is engageing directly in dialogue with the Commission; calls onacknowledges the measures taken by the Polish gGovernment to swiftly implement the rulings of the CJEU and to respect the primacy of Union law;
Amendment 245 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Calls uponSees no need for the Council to resume the formal hearings -in the last one of which was held as long ago as December 2018 - as soon as possible and to include in those hearingcontext of taking into account all the latest and major clarifications provided by the Polish authorities allnd the latest and major negative developmentsfindings of this procedure in the areas of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges the Council to finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of overwhelming evidence thereofStrongly recommends that the Council, when formulating possible recommendations, conduct as displayed in this resolution and in so many reports of international and European alogue with the Polish authorities in accorgdanisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involvedce with the principle of partnership and respect for Polish sovereignty, especially in areas not covered by EU competences;
Amendment 248 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
Amendment 254 #
2017/0360R(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51