Activities of Mikuláš PEKSA related to 2021/2111(DEC)
Shadow reports (2)
REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2020, Section VI – European Economic and Social Committee
SECOND REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2020, Section VI – European Economic and Social Committee
Amendments (6)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Understands the impact that the pandemic had on the activity of the Union institutions, including the tight deadlines for adopting new legislation and thus, for the consultative committees to deliver their opinions; recalls that the Committee adopted, prior to the approval of its amended procedure, 13 position papers in response to referrals to ensure an effective and timely contribution to the Union response; is aware that the Committee monitors its compliance with the institutional deadlines set for its opinions and that ad hoc measures have been adopted following an internal audit report from 2019; asks the Committee to report on these measures and other possible actions in this regard; recalls its recommendations made in previous discharge resolutions to enhance the interinstitutional cooperation and consequently the impact of the Committee’s work; further recalls its recommendation for the Committee to carry out a qualitative impact assessment of its opinions; acknowledges the importance to maintain the Committee as a strong consultative body, enabling the dialogue between the social partners, namely employers, employees and representatives of various other interests;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Takes note of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (“Court of Justice”) of 23 February 2022 on the case of possible harassment reported in 2018 by which the Court of Justice annuls the Decision No 293/19 of the Committee of 5 December 2019 that imposed the minimal possible penalty consisting of a written warning, dismisses the action as to the remainder, and orders the Committee to pay the costs; expects an internal reflection following this judgment in particular on the procedural violations, such as the one related to the right of defence, found by the Court of Justice in relation to the internal inquiry; observes with concern that, once again, it is undeniable that a serious breach of the Committee’s duty of care towards its members of staff has persisted for too long, creating a regrettable culture of impunity and harassment as a result of reprehensible managerial styles, illustrated by, among other elements, the recurrent emergence of requests for assistance and cases reported to OLAF;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes the conclusion of the settlement agreements with the two victims of moral harassment in December 2020 and March 2021 respectively; takes note that the last pending point for the full implementation of both settlement agreements depends on an upcoming change to the organisation chart in agreement with the Committee of the Regions and planned for implementation on 1 October 2022; calls on the Committee to promptly report to the budgetary authority on the eventual effective enforcement of this point; once again expresses its regret over the long lapse of time with respect to the Committee's enforcement of those settlement agreements, as legally required;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes the conclusion in April 2022 and the full implementation of the settlement agreement with one of the victims of serious misconduct; acknowledges as well the partial implementation of the measures agreed in March 2021 between the other victim of serious misconduct, former Committee member, and the Committee president; welcomes in particular the public statement by the Committee president, published on the Committee’s website, reiterating her sincere apologies to all those concerned for the true suffering caused by these wrongdoings; regrets, however, that the Committee still refuses to launch an external investigation to review the Committee’s HR procedures and the effectiveness thereof, with a focus on addressing harassment claims and ensuring the well-being of the staff;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the Committee’s monthly updates and the follow-up to Parliament’s observations in the 2020 discharge resolution; recalls that the OLAF report on case OC/2018/0666/A.1 only concerns the behaviour of the perpetrator towards the victims and that the judgement delivered by the Court of Justice in case T-377/20 simply examines the validity of the Bureau decision of 9 June 2020; points out that the long handling of the case by the Committee’s administration and particularly the shortcomings in the implementation of internal procedures have therefore in no way been examined or validated; believes that the cases occurred require a more in-depth analysis and strongly reiterates, therefore, its repeated call for an external investigation specifically on the action, or lack thereof, of the administrative hierarchy of the Committee over the extent of the case which led to the flagrant breach of its duty of care towards the staff; is deeply concerned that its reiterated and unambiguous calls for an exercise of accountability have been consistently ignored by the Committee and insists on the need to determine the responsibility of the administrative hierarchy of the Committee and, where applicable, apply Article 22 of the Staff Regulations;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Reiterates its concern about the fact that quantifying the total final cost of this case, estimated at approximately EUR 150 000 for the time being, is not yet possible because depends on the outcome of the legal procedure currently ongoing before the Belgium criminal court, in which the Committee is also a civil party; asks the Committee to promptly report to the budgetary authority on the conclusion of the legal procedure and to update the total final cost to the Union budget; reiterates its request to claim back from the perpetrator the corresponding amounts compensated to the victims by the Committee;