820 Amendments of Franco ROBERTI
Amendment 1 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the Union’s legal structure is based on the fundamental premise that each Member State shares with all the other Member States a set of common values on which the EU is founded, as stated in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union1 ; recalls further that the rule of law, as enshrined in EU primary law and further defined in the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), is akin to democracy and fundamental rights; stresses that any backsliding on the rule of lawreminds that the rule of law and rules-based international order are key to fight the spread of authoritarian regimes, the violation of international law, help consolidate democratic structures, and protect human rights; stresses that any backsliding on the rule of law, which is based on the separation and balancing of powers, in any given Member State significantly affects the common area of freedom, security and justice, as well as mutual trust and mutual recognition as leading principles of EU law in this area2 ; _________________ 1 See opinion 2/2013 of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Full Court) of 18 December 2014, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2454, paragraph 168. 2 Ibid., paragraph 191.
Amendment 5 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. UAcknowledges that almost two- thirds of the recommendations issued in 2022 related to important reforms have been followed up at some extent, yet, it shows concern on the number of issues identified in previous Rule of Law reports that remain unaddressed; urges the Commission to persist in its diligent monitoring of Member States’ legal frameworks in order to assess their alignment with the above-mentioned recommendations, and further calls on the Commission to become more insistent on the implementation of these critical reforms in cases where Member States’ systems do not meet the prescribed standards;
Amendment 10 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Recalls that the fight against corruption is essential to maintain the rule of law and preserve and foster citizens’ trust in public institutions and, to be effective, it requires a robust legal and administrative anti-corruption framework based on integrity, transparency and accountability, namely in public life, stressing the disclosure of interests declarations and the protection of whistleblowers when applicable;
Amendment 11 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. States that corruption is a menace that can destroy democracies and has to be combated in all its forms, undermining citizens' trust in institutions, and has to be combated in all its forms; points out that corruption is the most common avenue by which organised crime infiltrates and controls the economy; is worried that the latest Report shows either no or only very slow progress in relation to anti- corruption prevention measures in several Member States; is extremely worried about the reluctance to establish registers of lobbyists, transparency registers and proper systems of asset declarations by public office holders and senior officials, as well as about the lack of political will to introduce strict rules within revolving doors policies; highlights, in this context, the importance of a transparent legislative procedure with far-reaching access to documents, and rules to ensure the highest degree of transparency and accountability in public administrations and public decision-making with a view to preventing corruption11; _________________ 11 See, in this context, Article 3 of the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 May 2023 on combating corruption, replacing Council Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA and the Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of the Member States of the European Union and amending Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council (COM(2023)0234).
Amendment 13 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls, in this context, also for all EU institutions to adhere to the highest possible standards with a view to the prevention of corruption, such as, inter alia, the creation of an effective EU Ethics Body, the full application of Regulation 1049/200112 on access to documents, and the full application of the conditionality principle as regards the EU Transparency Register; calls on the Member States to try to reach an agreement as soon as possible on the proposed directive on combating corruption; with a view to establishing a common homogeneous framework of codes of conduct, standards preventing conflicts of interest and rules ensuring the transparency of procedures; _________________ 12 Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43).
Amendment 16 #
2023/2113(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Recalls that no sector is corruption-risk safe, including those that manage significant public funds or access to critical infrastructures and services, such as healthcare or construction; stresses that organised crime groups play an increasingly important role in these activities, which include counterfeiting, piracy and intellectual property rights infringements, which have skyrocketed in the digital environment; recalls that the criminal groups involved in these illegal activities often use the profits to finance other illegal activities;
Amendment 49 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
Amendment 60 #
2022/0402(CNS)
(13a) The child-parent relationship calls into question an essential aspect of the child’s identity, in particular, not only the right to a personal identity but also the right to live and grow up in a stable family environment. The best interests of the child should always prevail. The European Court of Human Rights has expressly stated that the best interests of the child reduces the margin of appreciation of the State Parties in the recognition of the child-parent relationship1a. Consequently, it becomes necessary to proceed with the recognition of parenthood regardless of the family context and the way in which the child is conceived. It is also necessary to guarantee the full legitimisation of the family, the conjugal relationship, understood as a nucleus of stable affections and relationships between persons, and of the children resulting from such relationship. _________________ 1a ECtHR, Judgment 22.11.2022 [Section III], D.B. and Others v. Switzerland - 58252/15 and 58817/15.
Amendment 62 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Under Article 21 TFEU and secondary legislation relating thereto as interpreted by the Court of Justice, the respect of a Member State’s national identity under Article 4(2) TEU and a Member State’s public policy cannot serve as justification to refuse to recognise a parent-child relationship between children and their same-sex parents for the purposes of exercising the rights that a child derives from Union law. In fact, the protection of the interests of the child should prevail over considerations of national identity and public policy, so that the child can live in a stable and recognised family free from any stigma, including from a legal point of view. This is particularly true if one considers that the best interest of the child is an integral part of the concept of public policy, thus favouring the entry into national law of new family and conjugal relations. In addition, for the purposes of exercising such rights, proof of parenthood can be presented by any means52 . Therefore, a Member State is not entitled to require that a person presents either the attestations provided for in this Regulation accompanying a court decision or an authentic instrument on parenthood, or the European Certificate of Parenthood created by this Regulation, where the person invokes, in the context of the exercise of the right to free movement, rights that a child derives from Union law. This should not, however, prevent a person from choosing to present in such cases also the relevant attestation or the European Certificate of Parenthood provided for in this Regulation. To ensure that Union citizens and their family members are informed that the rights that a child derives from Union law are not affected by this Regulation, the forms of the attestations and of the European Certificate of Parenthood annexed to this Regulation should include a statement specifying that the relevant attestation or the European Certificate of Parenthood do not affect the rights that a child derives from Union law, in particular the rights that a child enjoys under Union law on free movement, and that, for the exercise of such rights, proof of the parent-child relationship can be presented by any means. _________________ 52 Judgments of the Court of Justice of 25 July 2002, C-459/99, MRAX, ECLI:EU:C:2002:461, paragraphs 61 and 62, and of 17 February 2005, C-215/03, Oulane, ECLI:EU:C:2005:95, paragraphs 23 to 26.
Amendment 67 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)
Recital 17 a (new)
(17a) Furthermore, according to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, the best interests of the child also entails the legal identification of the persons responsible for raising them, meeting their needs and ensuring their welfare, as well as the possibility for the child to live and develop in a stable environment1a. It is therefore clear that the child will have an interest in the legal recognition of their relationship with the parents. _________________ 1a ECtHR, 10.4.2019 [GC], Advisory opinion requested by the French Court of Cassation
Amendment 127 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) Considerations of public interest should allow courts and other competent authorities establishing parenthood in the Member States to disregard, in exceptional circumstances, certain provisions of a foreign law where, in a given case, applying such provisions would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy (ordre public) of the Member State concerned. However, tThe courts or other competent authorities should not be able to apply the public policy exception in order to set aside the law of another State when doing so would be contrary to the Charter and, in particular, Article 21 thereof, which prohibits discrimination.
Amendment 152 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75
Recital 75
(75) Considerations of public interest should allow Member State courts or other competent authorities to refuse, in exceptional circumstances, to recognise or, as the case may be, accept a court decision or authentic instrument on the parenthood established in another Member State where, in a given case, such recognition or acceptance would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy (ordre public) of the Member State concerned. However, tThe courts or other competent authorities should not be able to refuse to recognise or, as the case may be, accept a court decision or an authentic instrument issued in another Member State when doing so would be contrary to the Charter and, in particular, Article 21 thereof, which prohibits discrimination.
Amendment 209 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
This Regulation shall not affect the competence of the authorities of the Member States to deal with parenthood matters in solely domestic cases.
Amendment 246 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22
Article 22
Amendment 272 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 278 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) upon application by any person claiming that the court decision infringes his fatherhood or her motherhood over the childtheir parenthood over the child and if the decision if it was given without such person having been given an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence;
Amendment 286 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. Point (a) of paragraph 1This Article shall be applied by the courts and other competent authorities of the Member States in observance of the fundamental rights and principles laid down in the Charter, in particular Article 21 thereof on the right to non- discrimination.
Amendment 289 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1
1. AnOnly partyies entitled under national law may challenge or appeal against a court decision on the application for refusal of recognition.
Amendment 301 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 306 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) upon application by any person claiming that the authentic instrument infringes his fatherhood or her mothertheir parenthood over the child, if the authentic instrument was formally drawn up or registered without that person having been involved;
Amendment 311 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 2
2. Point (a) of paragraph 1This Article shall be applied by the courts and other competent authorities of the Member States in observance of the fundamental rights and principles laid down in the Charter, in particular Article 21 thereof on the right to non- discrimination.
Amendment 316 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
The jurisdiction of the court of the Member State of origin establishing parenthood may not be reviewed. The test of public policy referred to in point (a) of Article 31(1) may not be applied to the rules relating to jurisdiction set out in Articles 6 to 9.
Amendment 323 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1
Article 45 – paragraph 1
1. An authentic instrument which has no binding legal effect in the Member State of origin shall have the same evidentiary effects in another Member State as it has in the Member State of origin, or the most comparable effects, provided that this is not manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State where it is presented.
Amendment 327 #
2022/0402(CNS)
2. The public policy (ordre public) referred to in paragraph 1is Article shall be applied by the courts and other competent authorities of the Member States in observance of the fundamental rights and principles laid down in the Charter, in particular Article 21 thereof on the right to non- discrimination.
Amendment 379 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 69 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 69 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States shall accept an authentic instrument which has no binding legal effect in the Member State of origin but which has evidentiary effects in that Member State, provided that this is not manifestly contrary to the public policy (ordre public) of the Member State in which acceptance is sought.
Amendment 385 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)
Article 70 – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)
(-a) the number of requests for the recognition of parenthood submitted pursuant to this Regulation
Amendment 389 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 a (new)
Article 70 a (new)
Article70a Guidelines 1. After the entry into force of this Regulation and before the date from which it shall apply, as indicated in Article 72 of this Regulation, the Commission shall publish guidelines to national authorities on how to apply and enforce this Regulation. 2. The Commission shall update every two years thereafter the guidelines taking into account, inter alia, the experience that has been gained in the application and enforcement of this Regulation and any relevant case law of the Court of Justice.
Amendment 218 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation applies to craft and industrinon- agricultural products listed under the combined nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/8724 _________________ 24 Council Regulation (EEC) N0 2685/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff Regulation (OJ L 256, 7.9.1987 p.1)
Amendment 221 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 226 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) ‘non-agricultural products’ means products, whether or not semi-finished, or the provision of services, excluding agricultural products and the provision of commercial services, intermediation services in the movement of goods or services ancillary to those operations, public supply of food and beverages or in any case all products not listed in Annex I to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and those listed in Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 and Regulation (EU) 2019/787 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 228 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 236 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) ‘productionqualifying step’ means any stage of production, processing or preparation, up to the point, where the product is in a form to be placed on the internal market that, according to the specification, confers on the product those specific attributes that establish its link with a given quality, feature or characteristic and the geographical origin referred to in Article 5(b);
Amendment 269 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) at least one of the productionqualifying steps of the product takes place in the defined geographical area.
Amendment 276 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall ensure that the administrative burdens associated with the procedures for registering Geographical Indications are kept to a minimum in order to facilitate the registration of the products referred to in Article 2(1);
Amendment 330 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Where a Member State charges a fee, the level of the fees shall be reasonable,avoid placing an excessive burden on businesses in order to foster the competitiveness of the producers of the geographical indications and shall take into account the situation ofs much as possible and shall consider the specific factors affecting micro, small and medium- sized enterprises.
Amendment 499 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37
Article 37
Amendment 504 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39
Article 39
Amendment 518 #
2022/0115(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Amendment 4 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
— having regard to the judgments of the CJEU on 16 February 2022 in cases C-156/21 Hungary v Parliament and Council and C-157/21 Poland v Parliament and Council on the measures for the protection of the Union budget,
Amendment 7 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that respect for the rule of law entails compliance with EU primary and secondary law, and with the core principle of the primacy of EU law; therefore has serious concerns about the recent developments where such principle has been rejected, as well as the role of the Court in interpreting and applying EU law;
Amendment 17 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic have shown that measures taken in urgency can have democratic deficits and lead to corruption, and that they lack proper scrutiny; stresses, therefore, the need for clear legal arrangements ensuring respect for the rule of law also during times of crisis; welcomes the ongoing efforts in that direction by Member States that are lacking such frameworks;
Amendment 22 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Stresses that the COVID-19 pandemic has increased public awareness and scrutiny of the importance of the respect for the rule of law and how State authorities act intimes of crisis which is to the benefit of healthy and well- functioning justice systems that provide much needed checks and balances; notes, in this regard, that surveys show that, compared to 2020, the same Member States continue to cluster around the higher and lower end of the scale of perceived judicial independence;
Amendment 22 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)
Citation 21 a (new)
— having regard to its resolution of 13 November 2020 on the impact of COVID-19 measures on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights,
Amendment 25 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Reminds that an efficient and fair justice system ensuring access to justice to all requires the strengthening of measures aimed at limiting duration and costs of both contentious and administrative proceedings, as well as making sufficient legal aid and remedies available to citizens;
Amendment 26 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. Welcomes that reforms to strengthen existing Councils of the Judiciary - whose role in safeguarding judicial independence is very important - are ongoing or have been completed; urges other Member States where such reforms have not yet advanced towards adoption or were not approved to continue focusing their efforts towards their achievement;
Amendment 41 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is deeply preoccupied by the fact that judicial independence continues to be an issue of serious concern in some Member States; condemns the continued political attacks on the independence of judiciary, the primacy of EU law and the implementation of the CJEU’s rulings in Hungary and Poland; notes with deep regret that these attacks have been worsening since the publication of the Report and often target judges and prosecutors who have contested the backsliding on judicial independence; reiterates the chilling effect that such attacks which constitute undue influence by the executive and legislative branches over the functioning of justice systems have on judges and prosecutors;
Amendment 46 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Defends the position that the principle of the separation of powers is essential to the proper functioning of justice systems across the EU and requires institutional structures where not only judges but also prosecution services are independent from undue political pressure; notes that cases like that of Poland where the Minister of Justice has a double role as Prosecutor General cannot ensure such separation of powers and is a worrying example of how this principle can be undermined; points to the importance of the rules governing judicial appointment in preventing the questioning of judges’ neutrality with regard to external factors such as the influence by the executive and legislative branches;
Amendment 52 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Believes that it is important to ensure accountability in the judiciary, especially where independence is questioned, and commends the examples seen in some Member States with regard to integrity frameworks strengthened by the application of general ethical principles to all categories of members of the judiciary, as well as other examples that include regular ethics training for judges, adopting new codes of ethics or putting in place measures like mandatory asset declarations;
Amendment 78 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls the important role of journalists and civil society in raising the alarm about, and drawing attention to, any breaches of the rule of law, including with regard to the proper functioning of justice systems, and calls for them to be given enhanced protection against intimidation or violence; condemns the instrumental use of justice to undermine freedom of information, notably through the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) in the EU; clarifies that these are a particular form of harassment used against journalist and others involved in protecting the public interest often resulting in self-censorship; therefore welcomes the announced Commission legislative proposal and recommendation addressing such abusive lawsuits in 2022;
Amendment 82 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Similarly, recalls the role of whistleblowers in denouncing breaches of the rule of law and the need to protect whistleblowers; as such, believes that ongoing revisions of existing national legislation or introduction of new rules and national bodies or offices as witnessed in some Member States are very positive developments that should serve as a reference to other Member States where similar protection and institutional settings are not yet in place;
Amendment 84 #
2021/2180(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes, moreover, that the rule of law relies on a system of institutional checks and balances based on high-quality public administration, the proper application of the law and the implementation of court decisions by public authorities; notes that legal certainty is essential for effectively fighting against corruption and; to this end, recalls that it is necessary to establish a regulatory framework that allows the crime of corruption to be defined in a uniform and shared way within the Union, without which investigation and data collection work would be strongly compromised; believes that an efficient and transparent public administration with regulations and procedures in place that prevent illegal behaviour is equally indispensable.
Amendment 89 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas, in certain Member States, journalists are increasingly subject to threats and attacks, in particular when investigating crime and corruption; whereas independence of media from political interference continues to be under threat in several Member States, including through the use of spyware tools by certain Member States to target journalists, opposition politicians and activists; whereas these unacceptable developments may have a chilling effect on the freedom of speech and freedom of the press and may not be allowed to set precedent both within the EU and towards EU candidate and potential candidate countries;
Amendment 139 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes with satisfaction that the report contains country-specific chapters; commends the Commission’s efforts to engage with national governments and national parliaments, as well as civil society and other national actors; encourages the Commission to devote greater efforts to deepening the analysis, and invites the Commission to ensure proper resources for that; believes that more time should be devoted to the Commission’s country visits, including on site; takes note of the country-specific discussions under the framework of the Commission’s annual rule of law report during each Council Presidency; suggests to focus these discussions on the Member States with the most pressing rule of law issues to be discussed in the first place, instead of in alphabetical order; emphasises that increased transparency would enhance the rule of law dialogue within the EU and therefore invites the Council to make these country-specific discussions public, including detailed public conclusions;
Amendment 191 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the annual report should identify cross-cutting trends at EU level; asks the Commission to identify instances where certain measures or practices that undermine the rule of law in one Member State become blueprints for others, or when the gravity and scope of such deficiencies have the potential to affect the Union as a whole; stresses that internal rule of law deficiencies may have a detrimental effect on the credibility of the EU’s foreign policy, in particular towards its immediate neighbourhood and candidates and potential candidates for EU membership;
Amendment 196 #
2021/2180(INI)
8. Commends the effort of the 2021 report to compare the situation with that of the 2020 report; believes that it is necessary to identify clearly positive and negative trends as regards the rule of law situation and provide an analysis of the underlying reasons for that; invites the Commission to include an assessment of all rule of law measures implemented in the previous year, accompanied by an analysis of their effectiveness and possible avenues for improvement;
Amendment 200 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the 2021 report could have provided clearer assessments, stating whether there were deficiencies, a risk of a serious breach or an actual breach of Article 2 TEU values in each of the pillars analysed in the country chapters; calls for a more integrated analysis on the interlinkages between the four pillars and of how combined deficiencies may amount to breaches or risks of a breach; emphasises that the annual Commission report should not merely be a description of previous events, but instead an analytical and prescriptive instrument in order to fulfil its preventive and mitigative purposes;
Amendment 207 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to include country-specific recommendations in the 2022 report; calls on the Commission to accompany such recommendations with binding deadlines for implementation, targets and concrete actions to be taken; calls on the Commission to include in subsequent reports indications on the implementation of its recommendations; and, in addition, to submit a mid-year evaluation report on the progress made in this regard to the Parliament;
Amendment 218 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recommends that the Commission indicate next to each of its recommendations the appropriate tools for the EU institutions to use if the shortcomings are not remedied; calls on the Commission not to hesitate in using those tools, especially when there is no trust in a quick implementation of the recommendations or a risk of further deterioration;
Amendment 226 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Regrets the fact that both the 2020 and the 2021 reports fails to fully encompass the Article 2 TEU values of democracy and fundamental rights, which are immediately affected when countries start backsliding on the rule of law; reiterates the intrinsic link between the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights;
Amendment 228 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Reaffirms the fact that EU law has primacy over national law, regardless of the way in which national justice systems are organised; deplores the serious and structural problems regarding judicial independence in certain Member States; invites the Commission to include strong binding recommendations in its 2022 report in order to ensure the independence of the judiciary in any EU Member State;
Amendment 232 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Recalls that media freedom and plurality are essential to democracy; is alarmed by the increasingly hostile environment in which media are operating inside many EU Member States, characterised by a high amount of violent incidents and threats against journalists, oppressive strategies by EU governments such as the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) and smear campaigns, and increasing state control over public media; stresses that the COVID-19 pandemic has further exacerbated challenges already faced by media operators; regrets that the 2021 report does not reflect the gravity of these trends, especially related to state control, strategic lawsuits and smear campaigns by certain EU Member States; urges the Commission to improve the media related chapters in this regard, to introduce EU legislation against the use of SLAPPs establishing minimum standards and to present an ambitious legal framework to counter the growing politicisation of the media in certain Member States in the upcoming Media Freedom Act; calls on the Commission to explore possibilities for additional and more flexible funding for independent, investigative journalism in the EU;
Amendment 235 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12c. Stresses that media freedom is closely related to artistic and academic freedom; underlines that the independence of education systems is under threat when the autonomous organisational structure of its institutions is not secured; calls, therefore, on the Commission to include all aspects of freedom of expression in its rule of law report;
Amendment 236 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 d (new)
Paragraph 12 d (new)
12d. Welcomes the fact that many EU Member States are among the world’s best performers in the fight against corruption according to the 2020 Corruption Perception Index, as mentioned by the Commission report; is, however, deeply worried by the fact that there is significant difference among the individual Member States with the best performing ones placed at first place and the worst performing ones ranked at 78th place; regrets the strong deterioration observed in some other Member States and the continued emergence of corruption cases involving high level officials; reiterates that the existence of national anti-corruption strategies can only be considered successful once their implementation has been effectively carried out; recalls the need to establish a regulatory framework that allows for a definition of the crime of corruption that is uniform and shared at European level; urges the Commission to update and enhance the EU anticorruption policy and instruments and ensure the proper implementation and enforcement, in order to provide for commons standards and benchmarks as a precondition for strengthening the mutual trust and sincere cooperation; reminds the importance for EU Member States to engage with EPPO and support actively its tasks;
Amendment 237 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 e (new)
Paragraph 12 e (new)
12e. Underlines that fair and free elections are among the absolute minimum standards for a functioning democracy and that every election process in the EU should be without any irregularities; urges the Commission to take all measures necessary once the risk of manipulation of elections in an EU Member State is identified; stresses that in case of the observation by the OSCE that elections have not taken place in a fair and free manner, strong consequences must be attached to this under the Article 7 Procedure;
Amendment 252 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Expresses particular concern about continued and systematic attacks on the fundamental rights of LGBTI+ persons, reinforced by the deterioration of the rule of law in several EU Member States; regrets that this development is not consistently reflected in the Commission’s rule of law report; calls on the Commission to systematically address this issue in all relevant country reports and the synthesis report;
Amendment 255 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Recalls the strong impact of measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic on the EU’s rule of law environment and fundamental rights, in particular in the area of justice, corruption and media freedom; stresses that monitoring of the use and proportionality of these measures should be continued until all measures are lifted without any exceptions; notes in this regard the risk of misuse of funds out of the EU Recovery and Resilience Facility; reiterates that these funds can only be distributed once these concerns have been fully addressed;
Amendment 264 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to strengthen the regular, inclusive and structured dialogue with governments and national parliaments, NGOs, national human rights institutions, ombudspersons, equality bodies, professional associations and other stakeholders; calls on the Commission to organise the consultation of stakeholders through a transparent process, based on clear criteria; considers that civil society organisations should be closely involved in all phases of the review cycle; highlights that thematically structured consultations would make the process more efficient and increase the amount of valuable feedback; stresses that the consultation questionnaire should allow stakeholders to report aspects beyond the scope envisaged by the Commission;
Amendment 274 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the time limits for consultation with civil society is often too short and should be suitably adapted and flexible in order to allow for complete and comprehensive input; points out that this has made it more difficult for stakeholders to prepare and plan their contributions and awareness-raising activities, in particular if the consultation coincides with winter holidays; invites the Commission to introduce the opportunity of year-round consultation for civil society instead of focusing mainly on time-limited calls for input; calls on the Commission to allow multilingual submissions; notes that consultation can be improved by ensuring follow-up with civil society actors on the input they provide;
Amendment 307 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Strongly condemns EU Member States refusing to engage in the annual Rule of Law dialogue; considers this refusal to be enough for the Commission to accelerate and refine further the situation in these countries concerned;
Amendment 321 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls its position regarding the involvement of a panel of independent experts to advise the three institutions, in close cooperation with the FRA; asks its Bureau, in light of the reluctancecalls ofn the Commission and the Council, to organise a public procurement procedure in order to create such a panel under the auspices of Parliament as a first step, in order to advise Parliament on compliance with Article 2 TEU values in different Member Statesto add their input as an annex to the report and include a justification of how these inputs were included in the annual report;
Amendment 334 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Reiterates that the annual report should serve as a basis for deciding whether to activate one or several relevant tools such as Article 7 TEU, the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation, the Rule of Law Framework or infringement procedures, including expedited procedures, applications for interim measures before the CJEU and actions regarding non-implementation of CJEU judgments; calls on the Commission to explicitly link these instruments to identified or possible rule of law issues in the report; calls on the institutions to activate such tools without delay;
Amendment 356 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls the importance of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation where breaches of the principles of the rule of law affect or seriously risk affecting the sound financial management of the Union budget or the protection of the financial interests of the Union; considers that the annual report is the most appropriate place to have a dedicated section and conduct a relevant analysis; urges the Commission to launch the procedure enshrined in Article 6(1) of that regulation at least in the cases of Poland and Hungary; recalls that the applicability, purpose and scope of the Regulation are clearly defined and do not need to be supported by further explanations; condemns the Commission’s intention to still draft guidelines even after the CJEU ruling confirming the legality and validity of the Regulation; calls on the Commission to explore the full potential of the Common Provisions Regulation and the Financial Regulation to protect the rule law;
Amendment 370 #
2021/2180(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedures; urges the Council to ensure that hearings take place on a regular basisat minimum once per Presidency and also address new developments; reiterates its call on the Council affecting rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; emphasises that there is no need for unanimity in the Council in order to identify a clear risk of a serious breach of EU values under Art. 7(1), neither to address concrete recommendations to the Member States in question, and to provide deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; reiterates its call on the Council to do so; insists that Parliament’s role and competences be respected;
Amendment 74 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) According to Article 3(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 191 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Union is committed to ensuring a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, based on the precautionary principle, on the principle that preventive action should be taken and that the polluter should pay.
Amendment 81 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Environmental crime is currently the fourth largest source of income for organized crime after drugs, weapons and human trafficking.
Amendment 94 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to constitute an environmental offence under this Directive, conduct should be unlawful under Union law protecting the environment or national laws, administrative regulations or decisions giving effect to that Union law. The conduct which constitutes each category of criminal offence should be defined and, where appropriate, a threshold which needs to be met for the conduct to be criminalised should be set. Such conduct should be considered a criminal offence when committed intentionally and, in certain cases, also when committed with serious negligence. Illegal conduct that causes death or serious injury of persons, substantial damage or a considerable risk of substantial damage for the environment or is considered otherwise as particularly harmful to the environment constitutes a criminal offence when committed with serious negligence. Member States remain free to adopt or maintain more stringent criminal law rules in that area.
Amendment 110 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) Ecocide refers to the process of environmental or ecological destruction and means unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts. It can be linked to unlawful economic activity, unsocial behaviour, disrespect of human rights, war crimes, excessive pollution, destruction of biodiversity or wilful and severe actions aggravating climate change beyond the enshrined limits according to the Paris agreement.
Amendment 141 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Environmental criminal offences harm nature and society. By reporting breaches of Union environmental law, peopleindividuals or organisations from the civil society perform a service of public interest and play a key role in exposing and preventing such breaches, and thus safeguarding the welfare of society. Individuals in contact with an organisation in the context of their work-related activities are often the first to know about threats or harm to the public interest and the environment. Persons who report irregularities are known as whistleblowers. Potential whistleblowers are often discouraged from reporting their concerns or suspicions for fear of retaliation. Such persons should benefit from balanced and effective whistleblowers protection set out under Directive (EU) 2019/1937of the European Parliament and of the Council25 . _________________ 25 Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law (OJ L 305/17).
Amendment 162 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) With a view to closer cooperation between Member States on environmental crime, it is necessary to extend the mandate of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) to cover the criminal offences defined in this Directive. The EPPO, which has its own powers and authority to coordinate investigations and prosecutions in cross- border cases, is currently the Union body best placed to deal with the most serious environmental crimes with a cross-border dimension. An extension of the mandate of the EPPO to cover serious environmental crime with a cross-border dimension by a decision of the European Council in accordance with Article 86(4) TFEU is therefore necessary. The EPPO would thus be able to deal with crimes with a cross-border dimension for which the strengthening of the criminal response is unlikely to be achieved through the traditional channels of judicial cooperation. In order to fulfil this new and broader task, EPPO needs adequate resources and funding targeted at environmental crime. The review of Directive (EU) 2017/1371 should propose the inclusion of environmental crimes to the criminal offences covered by that Directive and the review of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 an extension of the EPPO’s mandate to cover serious environmental crimes.
Amendment 183 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘public concerned’ means the persons affected or likely to be affected by the offences referred to in Articles 3 or 4. For the purposes of this definition, persons having a sufficient interest or maintaining the impairment of a right as well as non- governmental organisationsnon- profit organisations and associations to which, prior to the commission of the fact for which one proceeds, have been recognised, by virtue of the law, purposes of protecting the interests affected by the crime, promoting the protection of the environment and meeting any proportionate requirements under national law shall be deemed to have an interest;
Amendment 189 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Amendment 192 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
(5b) ‘polluter pays principle’ means that polluters should bear the costs of their pollution or environmental damage, including the cost of measures taken to prevent, control and remedy pollution, as well as the costs the polluters impose on society;
Amendment 193 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new)
(5c) ‘wanton’ means with reckless disregard for damage which would be clearly excessive in relation to the social and economic benefits anticipated;
Amendment 194 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 d (new)
(5d) ‘ecocide’ means unlawful or wanton acts committed with the knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood that those acts cause a severe and either wide-spread or long-term damage to the environment.
Amendment 195 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 e (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 e (new)
(5e) ‘One Health Approach’ means an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimise the health of people, animals and ecosystems. It recognises that the health of humans, domestic and wild animals, plants, and the wider environment including ecosystems are closely interlinked and inter-dependent;
Amendment 196 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 f (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 f (new)
(5f) 'widespread' means damage which extends beyond a limited geographic area, crosses state boundaries, or is suffered by an entire ecosystem or species or a large number of human beings;
Amendment 197 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 g (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 g (new)
(5g) 'long-term' means damage which is irreversible or which cannot be redressed through natural recovery within a reasonable period of time;
Amendment 203 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the traffic, discharge, emission or introduction of a quantity of materials or substances or ionising radiation into air, soil or water which causes or is likely to cause death or serious injury to any person or substantial damage to the quality of air, the quality of soil or the quality of water, or to animals or plants;
Amendment 227 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) the collection, transport, recovery, treatment or disposal of waste, the supervision of such operations and the after-care of disposal sites, including action taken as a dealer or a broker (waste management), when an unlawful conduct:
Amendment 272 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r a (new)
Amendment 274 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r b (new)
(rb) the significant harm of the environment in case of public or private investments when severely disrespecting the 'do no significant harm' principle within the meaning of Article 17 of the Taxonomy regulation;
Amendment 276 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r c (new)
(rc) the environmental damage to forests, including through committing forest fires intentionally or due to a lack of due diligence and the disrespect of the sustainability and greenhouse gas emissions saving criteria for biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels in Article 29 of (RED III - recast);
Amendment 278 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r d (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r d (new)
(rd) the violation of standards as set in the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (2022/0051(COD));
Amendment 279 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r e (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point r e (new)
(re) the damage of the environment as defined in Directive 2004/35/CE on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage;
Amendment 294 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)
(ea) non negligible quantity, negligible quantity/impact,
Amendment 296 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point e b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point e b (new)
(eb) dangerous activity1a; _________________ 1a Justification: dangerous activity is different to severity as a damage can be severe without having been produced by a dangerous activity. Where an activity is dangerous it has been committed wilfully and with criminal intent.
Amendment 298 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point e c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point e c (new)
Amendment 310 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – point d a (new)
(da) the polluter pays principle.
Amendment 312 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. For the offences mentioned in this Article and in line with Article25(3), Member States shall continuously ensure that new and updated legislation at Union, national and regional level regarding these offences is duly taken into account.
Amendment 327 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3(1) points (a) to (j), (n), (q), (r) are punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least sixeight years.
Amendment 332 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the offences referred to in Article 3(1) points (k), (l), (m), (o), (p) are punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least foursix years.
Amendment 364 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a power of representation of the legal person; and/or
Amendment 367 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) an authority to take decisions on behalf of the legal person; and/or
Amendment 371 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall also ensure that legal persons can be held liable where the lack of supervision or control, if applicable, throughout its entire supply chain, by a person referred to in paragraph 1 has made possible the commission of an offence referred to in Articles 3 and 4 for the benefit of the legal person by a person under its authority.
Amendment 374 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Member States shall ensure that the responsible corporate officer is always the Chief executive officer or other Senior management officials, whether or not sharing the responsibility with the elected board.
Amendment 376 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Member States shall prohibit the trading of corporate liability for individual liability.
Amendment 405 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that offences referred to in Article 3(1) points (a) to (j), (n), (q), (r) are punishable by fines, the maximum limit of which shall be not less than 15% of the average total worldwide turnover of the legal person [/undertaking] in the three business years preceding the fining decision.
Amendment 413 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that offences referred to in Article 3(1) points (k), (l), (m), (o), (p) are punishable by fines, the maximum limit of which shall be not less than 315% of the average total worldwide turnover of the legal person [/undertaking] in the three business years preceding the fining decision.
Amendment 436 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the offender restorestakes steps to prevent the illegal activity from leading to further consequences or provides for the safety, remediation and, where possible, restores the nature to its previous condition before the trial begins;
Amendment 515 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that, in accordance with their national legal system, members of the public concerned have appropriate rights to participate in proceedings concerning offences referred to in Articles 3 and 4, for instance as a civil party.
Amendment 575 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. The Commission shall by [OP – please insert the date - two years after the transposition period is over] and every two years thereafter, submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council assessing the extent to which the Member States have taken the necessary measures to comply with this Directive and providing recommendations to Member States. Member States shall provide the Commission with the necessary information for the preparation of that report.
Amendment 580 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. By one year after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall present a report on homogeneous and harmonised classification of environmental crimes prepared with the Member States and a regulatory classification of sanctions adapted to provide guidance to national competent authorities, prosecutors and judges in the application of the sanctions provided for in this Directive.
Amendment 582 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. 3 b (new). By one year after the entry into force of this Directive, notwithstanding Article 119 of Regulation 2017/1939, the Commission shall produce a report on extending the powers of the European Public Prosecutor's Office provided for in Article 86 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to include serious environmental crimes that are detrimental to the interests of the Union. The European Public Prosecutor's Office would thus be empowered to request independent investigations and to initiate legal proceedings in respect of environmental damage and environmental crime on a European scale. The report shall assess how the powers of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office should be extended to serious environmental crimes. The report shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal for a revision of Directive 2017/1371 to include environmental crimes to the criminal offences covered by the Directive and an extension of the EPPO’s mandate to cover serious environmental crimes.
Amendment 585 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3 c. By one year after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall present guidelines to clarify the procedural framework for the participation of members of the public in the criminal prosecution of environmental offences, including the definition of easily accessible admissibility criteria.
Amendment 587 #
2021/0422(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 3 d (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 d (new)
3 d. By two years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall present a report on how environmental crime negatively impacts upon the environment, One Health and the exceedance of planetary boundaries.
Amendment 52 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In order to enable Eurojust to identify cross-links between cross-border judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences as well as cross-links between judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences and information processed at Eurojust relating to other cases of serious crimes, it is essential that Eurojust receives, without delay, sufficient information to enable Eurojust to cross- check this data.
Amendment 61 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) For the identification of cross-links between terrorism investigations and judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences, a dataset that ensures reliable identification dataand that those data are kept and exchanged is crucial. Due to the uncertainties regarding alphanumerical data especially for third country nationals, it should be possible to exchange biometric data, which are the only certain identifiers. Due to the sensitive nature of biometric data and the impact processing of biometric data has on the respect for private and family life and the protection of personal data, as enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, a strict necessity test should be applied by the compesuch data should be provided in conformity with a strict tenst authorities and Eurojust in each casefor necessity and proportionality for the purposes of identifying the data subject.
Amendment 70 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) GivenWhere the sensitive nature of judicial proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences, it is not always possible forharing of information would undermine ongoing investigations or the safety of an individual, or where it would be contrary to the essential interests of the security of the Member State concerned, the competent national authorities could choose not to share the information on terrorist offences with Eurojust at the earliest stage. Such derogations from the obligation to provide information should remain an exceptionbe applied only in exceptional circumstances and on a case- by-case basis, as Eurojust handles the information provided by national authorities in compliance with Union law on data protection while also considering the confidentiality of the judicial proceedings brought.
Amendment 82 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Terrorist activitiesPresent-day terrorism and serious and organised crime are very dynamic and globalised phenomena that often affect two or more Member States. Terrorism already had a strong transnational component in the past. However, with the use and availability of electronic communication, transnational collaboration between terrorist offenders has increased significantly. Therefore, terrorist offences should be consi transnational nature of a terrorist offence might not be known at the moment at which the case is referred to a judicial authority. It is possible, however, for the transnational character of a terrorist offence to be revealed through cross- checking by Eurojust, making a timely exchange of data essential. Indered per se transnational in their nature, the investigation or prosecution of terrorist offences requires coordination and cooperation between prosecuting authorities or a prosecution on common bases, as provided for in Article 85 TFEU. Information on terrorism cases should be exchanged with Eurojust, if the specific circumstances of the case do not clearly indicate a purely national character.
Amendment 91 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Investigations and prosecutions in terrorism cases are often impeded by the lack of information exchange between national investigation and prosecution authorities. In order to be able to cross check new terrorist investigations also with previous investigations and establish potential links, it is necessary to stoensure theat a retention period for data on any previous investigations, not only on con and convictions is adequate for operational activictions andes. Therefore, it is necessary to extend the time limits for storing data in the European Judicial Counter-Terrorism Register, as national authorities may not be aware of links and developments relevant to investigations requiring close cooperation, and therefore may not carry out the requisite cross-checking of new investigation data even with previous investigations, which could lead to potential links, even with previous investigations that ended with an acquittal, not emerging. However, it is necessary to ensure that such data is processed for prosecution purposes only. The information may not be used for anything else but identifying links with ongoing investigations and prosecutions and for the support of those investigations and prosecutions.
Amendment 150 #
2021/0393(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2018/1727
Annex III – point d – indent 2
Annex III – point d – indent 2
— photographs. and other available biometric data.'.
Amendment 189 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 49
Recital 49
(49) In order to protect the proper functioning of the Union financial system from money laundering and terrorist financing, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) should be delegated to the Commission to identify third countries, whose shortcomings in their national AML/CFT regimes represent a threat to the integrity of the Union’s internal market. The changing nature of money laundering and terrorist financing threats from outside the Union, facilitated by a constant evolution of technology and of the means at the disposal of criminals, requires that quick and continuous adaptations of the legal framework as regards third countries be made in order to address efficiently existing risks and prevent new ones from arising. The Commission should take into account information from EU bodies also already involved in the EU AML/CFT framework and from international organisations and standard setters in the field of AML/CFT, such as FATF public statements, mutual evaluation or detailed assessment reports or published follow-up reports, and adapt its assessments to the changes therein, where appropriate.
Amendment 198 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Countries that are not publicly identified as subject to calls for actions or increased monitoring by international standard setters might still pose a threat to the integrity of the Union’s financial system. To mitigate those risks, it should be possible for the Commission to take action by identifying, based on a clear set of criteria and with the support of AMLA and other EU bodies also already involved in the AML/CFT framework, third countries posing a specific and serious threat to the Union’s financial system, which may be due to either compliance weaknesses or significant strategic deficiencies of a persistent nature in their AML/CFT regime, and the relevant mitigating measures. Those third countries should be identified by the Commission. According to the level of risk posed to the Union’s financial system, the Commission should require the application of either all enhanced due diligence measures and country-specific countermeasures, as it is the case for high-risk third countries, or country-specific enhanced customer due diligence, such as in the case of third countries with compliance weaknesses.
Amendment 202 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) Potential external threats to the Union’s financial system do not only emanate from third countries, but can also emerge in relation to specific customer risk factors or products, services, transactions or delivery channels which are observed in relation to a specific geographical area outside the Union. There is therefore a need to identify money laundering and terrorist financing trends, risks and methods to which Union’s obliged entities may be exposed. AMLA is best placed to, with the support of other EU bodies also already involved in the AML/CFT framework, can detect any emerging ML/TF typologies from outside the Union, to monitor their evolution with a view to providing guidance to the Union’s obliged entities on the need to apply enhanced due diligence measures aimed at mitigating such risks.
Amendment 217 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) Detailed rules should be laid down to identify the beneficial owners of corporate and other legal entities and to harmonise definitions of beneficial ownership. While a specified percentage shareholding or ownership interest does not automatically determine the beneficial owners, it should be one factor among others to be taken into account. Member States should be able, however, to decide that a percentage lower than 25% may be an indication of ownership or control. Control through ownership interest of 25% plus one10% of the shares or voting rights or other ownership interest should be assessed on every level of ownership, meaning that this threshold should apply to every link in the ownership structure and that every link in the ownership structure and the combination of them should be properly examined.
Amendment 260 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a
(a) an undertaking other than a credit institution or an investment firm, which carries out one or more of the activities listed in points (2) to (12), (14) and (15) of Annex I to Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council43 , including the activities of currency exchange offices (bureaux de change), or theand creditors as defined in Article 4 proint (2) of Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, and in Article 3, point (b) of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, or an undertaking whose the principal activity of which is to acquire holdings, including a financial holding company and a mixed financial holding company; _________________ 43 Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338).
Amendment 262 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a a (new)
(aa) a central securities depository as defined in Article 2 point (1) of Regulation 909/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council;
Amendment 263 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a b (new)
(ab) an account information service provider as defined in Article 4 point (19) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
Amendment 281 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 22
(22) ‘beneficial owner’ means any natural person who ultimately owns or, controls or benefits from a legal entity or an express trust or similar legal arrangement, or an organisation that has legal capacity under national law, as well as any natural person on whose behalf or for the benefit of whom a transaction or activity or business relationship is being conducted;
Amendment 285 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 24
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 24
(24) ‘formal nominee arrangement’ means a contract or a formal arrangement with an equivalent legal value to a contract,n equivalent arrangement between thea nominee and the nominator, where the nominator is a legal entity or natural person that issues instructions to a nominee to act on their behalf in a certain capacity, including as a director or shareholder, and the nominee is a legal entity or natural person instructed by the nominator to act on their behalf;
Amendment 307 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 27 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 27 a (new)
(27a) ‘high-net-worth customer means a customer whose business relationship with the obliged entity is worth at least EUR 1 million or the equivalent in national currency in liquid financial assets;
Amendment 311 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 29 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 29 a (new)
Amendment 312 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point d
(d) a public authority with designated responsibilities for combating and preventing money laundering or terrorist financing;
Amendment 328 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
(a) auditors, external accountants, wealth or asset managers and tax advisors, and any other natural or legal person that undertakes to provide, directly or by means of other persons to which that other person is related, material aid, assistance or advice on tax, investment or personal finance matters as principal business or professional activity;
Amendment 331 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b – introductory part
(b) notaries, lawyers and other independent legal professionals, where they participate, whether by acting on behalf of and for their client in any financial or real estate transaction, or by assisting in the planning or carrying out of transactions for their client concerning any of the following:
Amendment 334 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b – point i
(i) buying and selling of real or virtual property or business entities;
Amendment 339 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d
(d) estate agents, including when acting as intermediaries in the letting of immovable property for transactions for which the monthly rent amounts to EUR 102 000 or more, or the equivalent in national currency;
Amendment 340 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d
(d) estate agents, including when acting as intermediaries in the letting of immovable property for transactions for which the monthly rent amounts to EUR 102 000 or more, or the equivalent in national currency;
Amendment 345 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point e a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point e a (new)
(ea) persons trading in high value goods and services, including motor vehicles, aircrafts and watercrafts, vessels and aircrafts, where the value of the transaction or linked transactions amounts to at least EUR 2 000 or the equivalent in national currency;
Amendment 350 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
(i) persons trading or acting as intermediaries in the trade of works of art, including when this is carried out by art galleries and auction houses, where the value of the transaction or linked transactions amounts to at least EUR 102 000 or the equivalent in national currency;
Amendment 351 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point i
(i) persons trading or acting as intermediaries in the trade of works of art, including when this is carried out by art galleries and auction houses, where the value of the transaction or linked transactions amounts to at least EUR 102 000 or the equivalent in national currency;
Amendment 355 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point j
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point j
(j) persons storing, trading or acting as intermediaries in the trade of works of art when this is carried out within free zones and customs warehouses, where the value of the transaction or linked transactions amounts to at least EUR 102 000 or the equivalent in national currency;
Amendment 356 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point j
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point j
(j) persons storing, trading or acting as intermediaries in the trade of works of art when this is carried out within free zones and customs warehouses, where the value of the transaction or linked transactions amounts to at least EUR 102 000 or the equivalent in national currency;
Amendment 370 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
(3a) company owners of any kind with annual turnover of more than a billion euros and with offices in at least two European countries;
Amendment 390 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Amendment 403 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4
Article 7 – paragraph 4
4. By [2 years after the entry into force of this Regulation], AMLA shall issue guidelines on the elements that obliged entities should take into account when deciding on the extent of their internal policies, controls and procedures, after consulting the European Banking Authority, shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall specify the elements that obliged entities should take into account when deciding on the extent of their internal policies, controls and procedures based on their assessed level of risk. They shall also include guidance on how to determine the number of staff to be entrusted with compliance functions as set out in Article 9, taking into account the nature and size of obliged entities and the inherent risks of the sector in which they operate.
Amendment 406 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission is empowered to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 4 of this Article in accordance with Articles 38 to 41 of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final].
Amendment 450 #
2021/0239(COD)
1. A parent undertaking shall ensure that the requirements on internal procedures, risk assessment and staff referred to in Section 1 of this Chapter apply in all branches and subsidiaries of the group in the Member States and, for groups whose parent undertaking is established in the Union in third countries. The group-wide policies, controls and procedures shall also include data protection policies and policies, controls and procedures for sharing information within the group for AML/CFT purposes. To this end, a parent undertaking shall perform a group-wide risk assessment, taking into account the risks identified by all branches and subsidiaries of the group, and use it to establish and implement group-wide policies, controls and procedures. The group-wide policies, controls and procedures shall also include data protection policies and policies, controls and procedures for sharing information within the group for AML/CFT purposes. Obliged entities that are part of a group shall implement the aforementioned group-wide policies, controls and procedures, taking into account their specificities and risks to which they are exposed.
Amendment 451 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The policies, controls and procedures pertaining to the sharing of information referred to in paragraph 1 shall require obliged entities within the group to exchange information when such sharing is relevant for preventing money laundering and terrorist financing, including customer due diligence and risk management. The sharing of information within the group shall cover in particular the identity and characteristics of the customer, its beneficial owners or the person on behalf of whom the customer acts, the nature and purpose of the business relationship and of the transactions, as well as, where applicable, the analysis of atypical transactions and the suspicions that funds are the proceeds of criminal activity or are related to terrorist financing reported to FIU pursuant to Article 50, unless otherwise instructed by the FIU. The group-wide policies, procedures and controls shall require that entities within a group which are not obliged entities according to Article 3 of this Regulation to provide relevant information to obliged entities within the same group for them to comply with requirements set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 452 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Groups shall put in place group-wide policies, controls and procedures to ensure that the information exchanged pursuant to the first and second subparagraph is subject to sufficient guarantees in terms of confidentiality, data protection and use of the information, including to prevent its disclosure.
Amendment 455 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Where branches or subsidiaries of obliged entities are located in third countries where the minimum AML/CFT requirements are less strict than those set out in this Regulation, the obliged entity concernedparent undertaking shall ensure that those branches or subsidiaries comply with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, including requirements concerning data protection, or equivalent.
Amendment 456 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. Where the law of a third country does not permit compliance with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, obliged entitiesthe parent undertaking shall take additional measures to ensure that branches and subsidiaries in that third country effectively handle the risk of money laundering or terrorist financing, and the head office shall inform the supervisors of their home Member State of those additional measures. Where the supervisors of the home Member State consider that the additional measures are not sufficient, they shall exercise additional supervisory actions, including requiring the group not to establish any business relationship, to terminate existing ones or not to undertake transactions, or to close down its operations in the third country.
Amendment 472 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – point b a (new)
(ba) the criteria to be taken into account for identifying occasional transactions, including those involving crypto-assets;
Amendment 473 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – point b b (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 5 – point b b (new)
(bb) the criteria to be taken into account to identify business relationships;
Amendment 491 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3
Article 16 – paragraph 3
3. By [2 years after the date of application of this Regulation], AMLA, , based also on consultations with EU bodies also already involved in the AML/CFT framework, shall issue guidelines on the risk variables and risk factors to be taken into account by obliged entities when entering into business relationships or carrying out occasional transactions.
Amendment 497 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where an obliged entity is unable to comply with the customer due diligence measures laid down in Article 16(1), it shall refrain fromnot carrying out a transaction or establishing a business relationship, and shall terminate the business relationship and considershall filinge1a a suspicious transaction report to the FIU in relation to the customer in accordance with Article 50. _________________ 1a In this proposal, when an OE cannot determine the UBO, or identify the customer’s identity, or obtain information on the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship or if they cannot ensure that ensure that the transactions conducted are consistent with the obliged entity's knowledge of the customer, the business and risk profile, including where necessary the source of funds… no systematic STR is filed. The OE can only “consider” filing it. This is not enough in Europol’s view.
Amendment 530 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the use of electronic identification means and relevant trust services as set out in Regulation (EU) 910/2014 with at least the assurance level "high".
Amendment 532 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
For the purposes of verifying the information on the beneficial owner(s), obliged entities shall also consulttake the necessary measures including the consultation of the central registers referred to in Article 10 of Directive [please insert reference – proposal for 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive - COM/2021/423 final] as well as additional information. Obliged entities shall determine the extent of the additional information to be consultedmeasures to be taken, having regard to the risks posed by the transaction or the business relationship and the beneficial owner. The obliged entities shall be satisfied that they know who the beneficial owner is, including, as regards legal persons, trusts, companies foundations and similar legal arrangements, taking necessary measures to understand the ownership and control structure of the customer.
Amendment 536 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
By way of derogation from paragraph 1 to 4, an obliged entity may refrain from the identification and verification of the customer or beneficial owner if the obliged entity has already verified and identified the person in question on a previous occasion in the previous six months in line with the requirements laid down in paragraph 1 to 4 and there is no reasonable doubt that the information obtained on that previous occasion is no longer accurate.
Amendment 588 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 6
Article 23 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall review the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 2 on a regular basiat least every two years to ensure that the specific countermeasures identified pursuant to paragraph 5 take account of the changes in the AML/CFT framework of the third country and are proportionate and adequate to the risks.
Amendment 595 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, when drawing up the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 2 shall take into account information onfrom EU bodies also already involved in the EU AML/CFT framework and from jurisdictions under increased monitoring by international organisations and standard setters with competence in the field of preventing money laundering and combating terrorist financing, as well as relevant evaluations, assessments, reports or public statements drawn up by them.
Amendment 598 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 5
Article 24 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall review the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 2 on a regular basiat least every two years to ensure that the specific enhanced due diligence measures identified pursuant to paragraph 4 take account of the changes in the AML/CFT framework of the third country and are proportionate and adequate to the risks.
Amendment 614 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) the recurrence of the involvement of the third country into money laundering and terrorist financing schemes in criminal analysis and investigations of Member States supported by Europol
Amendment 617 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
3. For the purposes of determining the level of threat referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may request AMLA to adopt an opinion aimed at assessing the specific impact on the integrity of the Union’s financial system due to the level of threat posed by a third country. To do so, AMLA can contact other EU bodies also already involved in the EU AML/CFT framework, as well as Europol.
Amendment 622 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, when drawing up the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 1, shall take into account in particular relevant evaluations, assessments or reports drawn up by EU bodies also already involved in the AML/CFT framework and by international organisations and standard setters with competence in the field of preventing money laundering and combating terrorist financing.
Amendment 628 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 7
Article 25 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall review the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 2 on a regular basiat least every two years to ensure that the measures referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 take account of the changes in the AML/CFT framework of the third country and are proportionate and adequate to the risks.
Amendment 634 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3
Article 26 – paragraph 3
3. In issuing and reviewing the guidelines referred to in paragraph 1, AMLA shall take into account evaluations, assessments or reports of EU bodies also already involved in the AML/CFT framework, of international organisations and standard setters with competence in the field of preventing money laundering and combating terrorist financing.
Amendment 641 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) verify the identity of the customer and the beneficial owner after the establishment of the business relationship, provided that the specific lower risk identified justified such postponement, but in any case no later than 360 days of the relationship being established;
Amendment 703 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2
Article 35 – paragraph 2
2. Obliged entities shall apply one or more of the measures referred to in Article 28(4) on a risk-sensitive basis to mitigate the risks posed by the business relationship, until such time as that person is deemed to pose no further higher risk, but in any case for not less than 124 months following the time when the individual is no longer entrusted with a prominent public function.
Amendment 705 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 a (new)
Article 36 a (new)
Amendment 714 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Obliged entities may outsource tasks deriving from requirements under this Regulation for the purpose of performing customer due diligence to an agent or external service provider established within the European Union, whether a natural or legal person, with the exception of natural or legal persons residing or established in third countries identified pursuant to Section 2 of this Chapter.
Amendment 746 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In case of corporate entitiesand other legal entities regardless of form or structure, the beneficial owner(s) as defined in Article 2(22) shall be the natural person(s) who owns, control(s), directly or indirectly, or benefits from, the corporate entity, either through an ownership interest or through control via other means.
Amendment 755 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
For the purpose of this Article, ‘control through an ownership interest’ shall mean an ownership of 25% plus on10% or more of the shares or voting rights or other ownership interest in the corporate entity, including through bearer shareholdings, on every level of ownership.
Amendment 759 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
For the purpose of this Article, ‘direct control through an ownership interest’ shall mean an ownership of 2510% plus one of the shares or voting rights or other ownership interest in the corporate entity, including through bearer shareholdings, on every level of ownership held by a natural person.
Amendment 763 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
For the purpose of this Article, ‘indirect control through an ownership interest’ shall mean an ownership of 10% plus one of the shares or voting rights or other ownership interest in the corporate entity held by another corporate entity, which is under the control of a natural person, or by multiple corporate entities, which are under the control of the same natural person(s).
Amendment 766 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
For the purpose of this Article, ‘control via other means’ shall include at leastfor example1a one of the following: _________________ 1a 5th AMLD did not define “control via other means”. The relations between the UBO and the corporate entity in a money laundering scheme can be very different, depending on the criminal case and the list proposed here is limitative. Those schemes evolve.
Amendment 769 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) the right to appoint or remove more than half of theany members of the board or similar officers of the corporate entity;
Amendment 774 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point d a (new)
(da) power of attorney to manage or dispose of the entity’s assets or income, in particular bank or securities accounts;
Amendment 780 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Article 42 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall notify to the Commission by [3 months from the date of application of this Regulation] a list of the types of corporate and other legal entities existing under their national laws with beneficial owner(s) identified in accordance with paragraph 1. The notification shall include the specific categories of entities, description of characteristics, names and, where applicable, legal basis under the national laws of the Member States. It shall also include an indication of whether, due to the specific form and structures of legal entities other than corporate entities, the mechanism under Article 45(3) applies, accompanied by a detailed justification of the reasons for that. In this notification, Member States shall also include other legal entities or vehicles which, under national law, identification of beneficial ownership information is not deemed applicable, in particular if that is the case for investment vehicles such as special purpose vehicles or entities, protected cell companies or series limited liability companies.
Amendment 786 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission shall make recommendations to Member States on the specific rules and criteria to identitfy the beneficial owner(s) of legal entities other than corporate entities by [1 year from the date of application of this Regulation] and indicate whether, on a risk sensitive basis, any specific rules should apply. These recommendations shall be public. In the event that Member States decide not to apply any of the recommendations, they shall notify the Commission thereof and provide a justification for such a decision.
Amendment 791 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 42 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) companies listed on a regulated market that is subject to disclosure requirements consistent with Union legislation or subject to equivalent international standards, provided that beneficial ownership information is gathered and available in equivalent terms as those set out in this Chapter; and
Amendment 797 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the economic and legal settlor(s);
Amendment 800 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 43 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall notify to the Commission by [3 months from the date of application of this Regulation] a list of legal arrangements and of legal entities, similar to express trusts, where the beneficial owner(s) is identified in accordance with paragraph 1. In the case where the parties of the express trust laid down in paragraph 1 point (a), (b), (c), or (d) are corporate or legal entities or arrangements themselves, the beneficial owner shall be the natural person who is the beneficial owner of those entities or arrangements, or the ultimate natural person who exercises control through a chain of control or ownership of corporate or legal entities or arrangements.
Amendment 808 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 2
2. Beneficial ownership information shall be obtained within 14 calendar days from the creation of legal entities or legal arrangements. It shall be updated promptly, and in any case no later than 14 calendar days following any change of the beneficial owner(s), and on an annual basis. according to the frequency as set-out in Article 21.2 of this Regulation.
Amendment 828 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – title
Article 46 – title
Amendment 829 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 46 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Where the trustee or person holding an equivalent position in a similar legal arrangement is not established or resides in the Union, beneficial ownership information shall be obtained and held in the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 by either the settlor or the beneficiary, provided that: 1) the express trust or legal arrangement is governed under the law of one Member State; or 2) either the settlor or the beneficiary are residents in one Member State.
Amendment 835 #
2021/0239(COD)
(ba) (c ) own or acquire a majority or minority stake in bodies governed by public law, as defined under Article 2(1), point (4) of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 836 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
(bb) (d) benefit from public funds through public procurement procedures or contracts, governed either under EU law or national law.
Amendment 837 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 48 – paragraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 2
2. Where the legal entity, the trustee of the express trust or the person holding an equivalent position in a similar legal arrangement enters into multiple business relationships or acquires real estate in different Member States, a certificate of proof of registration of the beneficial ownership information in a central register held by one Member State shall be considered as sufficient proof of registration. This certificate should in particular include reference to the requirements of Article 10.3 of Directive [please insert reference – proposal for 6th Anti-Money Laundering Directive - COM/2021/423final] in case no BO was identified.
Amendment 841 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 49 – paragraph 2 a (new)
By [2 years after the date of entry into force of this Directive], AMLA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards and submit them to the Commission for adoption. Those draft regulatory technical standards shall define indicators to classify the level of gravity of infringements and criteria to be taken into account when setting the level of administrative sanctions, including ranges of pecuniary sanctions relative to the turnover of the entity that shall be applied as references for effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions. The Commission is empowered to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in paragraph 1a of this Article in accordance with Articles 38 to 41 of Regulation [please insert reference – proposal for establishment of an Anti- Money Laundering Authority - COM/2021/421 final].
Amendment 842 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Obliged entities shall report to the FIU all suspicious transactions, including attempted ns of money laundering, predicate offences and terrorist financing, including on attempted transactions.1a _________________ 1a “Suspicious transactions”. The scope of the obligation to report should not be narrowly confined to “transactions”: suspicions may arise in a wide range of different circumstances in the course of the diversified businesses carried out by the multiple categories of obliged entities. It is essential that STRs are filed when the facts, activities or information pertaining to suspicions are not only related to “transactions”. Ultimately, suspicions of ML, predicate offences or TF have to be reported to the FIU whatever the source and regardless of there being a “transaction” (even attempted). The provision in par. 1 should be broadened accordingly.
Amendment 850 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) reporting to the FIU, on their own initiative, where the obliged entity knows, suspects or has reasonable grounds to suspect that funds or activities, regardless of the amount involved, are the, are related to proceeds of criminal activity or are related to terrorist financing, and by responding to requests by the FIU for additional information in such cases; 1a _________________ 1a “Funds”. Along the same lines, while article 50(1) sets out a broad scope for the notion of “suspicion” to reported, article 50(2) seems to unduly limit this reporting obligation only to cases where there are “funds” involved. It is important, instead, to clarify that the reports are due, in cases of suspicion, not only in relation to “funds” but taking account of any relevant underlying fact, circumstance or information (concerning, e.g., the customer, his/her/its counterparts, other subjects or activities involved). Furthermore, while the reference to “funds” (dating back to the first AMLD) may have been appropriate when the scope of the obligation was limited to financial institutions, it certainly inappropriate now to encompass non financial activities subject to the same obligation.
Amendment 856 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
For the purposes of points (a) and (b), obliged entities shall reply to are request for information by the FIU within 5 days. In justified and urgent cases, FIUs shall be able to shorten such a deadline to 24 hours. or a different deadline set by the FIU taking account of the urgency and the complexity of the query.1a _________________ 1a Deadlines for replying to requests. Setting “ex ante” a mandatory deadline in the regulation, applicable in all cases for obliged entities to reply to requests for information by the FIU does not seem appropriate and can be detrimental. In fact, on one hand the upper limit of 5 days may not be sufficient for gathering necessary information, especially in complex cases that involve several transactions and business relationships or where data has to be collected across multiple entities in the group or in the cases of outsourcing arrangements (see article 20) or, finally, when it comes to certain categories of obliged entities which transmit to the FIU such information through self-regulatory bodies. In these cases, the need to comply with the deadline would lead to poor information gathering and response to the FIU. On the other hand, having a 5 days timespan for providing feedback to the FIU, or even 24 hours, would be counterproductive when the reaction has to be prompt and quicker, typically in cases where transactions are in progress and decisions on postponement or seizure have to be taken immediately. Moreover, the consequences of the failure to comply with the deadlines are unclear; in case of delay, would any sanction be applicable to the obliged entity? A suitable alternative to the proposed and excessively rigid one- size-fits-all approach of a threshold set in primary provisions would be to foresee that the FIU, when and to the extent appropriate, set a deadline for replies taking account of circumstances (e.g. complexity, urgency). This solution would allow for the necessary flexibility and could be assisted by administrative sanctions.
Amendment 857 #
2021/0239(COD)
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, obliged entities shall assess transactions identified pursuant to Article 20 as atypical in order to detect those that can be suspected of being linked to money laundering or terrorist financing. A suspicion is based, for example, on the characteristics of the customer and his/her/its counterparts, the size, nature and methods of execution of the transaction or activity, the link between several transactions or activities and any other circumstance known to the obliged entity, including the origin of funds or assets and the consistency of the transaction or activity with the risk profile of the client.1a _________________ 1a The notion of "atypical transaction" (which is mentioned only in recital 40 in relation to automated monitoring systems for certain obliged entities) and that of “suspicion” should be defined or better described. While this objective could be achieved mostly through appropriate guidance by AMLA, this provision in the AMLR could nonetheless be made more specific by referencing, as relevant factors, at least also the characteristics of the customer’s counterparts, the methods of execution of the transaction (e.g. the splitting of operations) indications (or lack thereof) on the origin of involved funds or assets.
Amendment 865 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 5
Article 50 – paragraph 5
5. AMLA shall issue and periodically update guidance on indicators of unusual or suspicious activity or behaviours with the assistance of other EU bodies also already involved in the AML/CFT framework.
Amendment 928 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 1
1. Persons trading in goods or providing services may accept or make a payment in cash only up to an amount of EUR 102 000 or equivalent amount in national or foreign currency, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked.
Amendment 929 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 1
1. Persons trading in goods or providing services may accept or make a payment in cash only up to an amount of EUR 102 000 or equivalent amount in national or foreign currency, whether the transaction is carried out in a single operation or in several operations which appear to be linked.
Amendment 938 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 59 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. When there are indications that payments in cash, below or above the threshold of 2000 euros, are related to criminal activity, Member States shall record that information, in particular the owner and the recipient of the cash, and ensure that the information collected is available to FIUs and other competent authorities in charge of investigations, including, in cross-border cases, to Europol.
Amendment 940 #
2021/0239(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 59 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Those sanctions should apply to the breach of the limit under this Regulation and should not take into account the potential criminal activity associated with the cash, which may be the object of further investigation and measures that fall outside the scope of this Regulation.
Amendment 13 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU’s coordinated environmental strategy encourages cooperation and ensures that EU policies are consistent with each other; whereas the European Green Deal sets the ambition of zero-pollution, to be delivered through a cross cutting strategy to protect citizens’ health from environmental degradation and pollution while at the same time calls for a just transition that leaves nobody behind;
Amendment 15 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Whereas ensuring the liability for environmental damage is key to making European businesses more sustainable over the long term; whereas such an achievement is closely interlinked through the development of related legislation on corporate due diligence, corporate social accountability and sustainable corporate governance;
Amendment 17 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Amendment 22 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas ex-post liability rules complement ex-ante safety regulation and market-based instrument (such as environmental taxation) aiming at the reduction of environmental harm in order to fulfil the objectives of prevention and compensation;
Amendment 23 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
B b. Whereas the current regime for environmental liability, by not encompassing diffuse pollution by companies whose activities result in the production, use or release of hazardous chemicals, nanoplastics, pesticides, CO2 and other greenhouse gases emissions, is not adequate to fully ensure a high level of protection of the environment;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
B c. Whereas there is an increasing number of cases where victims of pollution caused by subsidiaries of European companies try to bring environmental liability lawsuits against parent companies before courts in the EU;
Amendment 25 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the ELD established ‘a framework of environmental liability based on the ‘polluter pays’ principle, to prevent and remedy environmental damage; whereas the ELD complements main pieces of EU environmental legislation, to which it is directly or indirectly linked, in particular the Habitat Directive9 , the Birds Directive10 , the Water Framework Directive11 , the Marine Strategy Framework Directive12 and the Offshore Safety Directive13 ; _________________ 10Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7. 11Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. 12Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy, OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19. 13Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations, OJ L 178, 28.6.2013, p. 66. 9Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
Amendment 26 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the ELD, which established a framework of environmental liability based on the Polluter-Pays principle to prevent and remediate environmental damage, complements main pieces of EU environmental legislation, to which it is directly or indirectly linked, in particular the Habitat Directive9 , the Birds Directive10 , the Water Framework Directive11 , the Marine Strategy Framework Directive12 and the Offshore Safety Directive13 ; _________________ 9Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. 10Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7. 11Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. 12Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy, OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19. 13Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations, OJ L 178, 28.6.2013, p. 66.
Amendment 28 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas it appears that the majority of Member States do not provide for mandatory financial security instruments in their legislation, but several countries do require them15 ; whereas, where implemented, these instruments seem to have proved their worth, showing the interest of an harmonised mandatory financial security regime at EU level; _________________ 15 Directorate-General for Environment, Outcome of the Specific Contract 'Support for the REFIT actions for the ELD – phase 2', European Commission, Brussels, 2019, p. 17.
Amendment 29 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas although sufficient insurance cover is available in most markets, including for complementary and compensatory remediation, demand is generally low due to a lack of reported incidents, sub-optimal enforcement and slower developments in emerging markets16 ; ; whereas this as such does not form an obstacle to introducing mandatory financial guarantees; _________________ 16REFIT Evaluation of the Environmental Liability Directive, p. 47.
Amendment 32 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas operator insolvency as a consequence of major accidents remains a problem in the EU, thereby resulting in the disregard for the “’polluter pays’ principle;
Amendment 39 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Amendment 43 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to assess and bridge gaps in the implementation of the ELD and the ECD across the Member States;
Amendment 48 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. ObservesPoints out that the discretionary powers set out in the ELD, the lack of awareness and information about the ELD, insufficient resources and expertise and the weak mechanisms for securing compliance and effective governance at national, regional and local level have led to implementation deficiencies, considerable variability between Member States in the number of cases, and an uneven playing field for operators; is therefore of the opinion that additional efforts are required to ensure regulatory standardisation in the EU and increased public confidence in the effectiveness of EU laws;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that in many Member States, the budgets of environmental inspectorates have stagnated or decreased due to the financial crisis and that even large, well-resourced authorities can find it difficult to independently develop knowledge of the best ways to ensure compliance; is thus of the opinion that stronger support at EU level is needed and, therefore, calls on the Commission to support Member States in the development of tools for operators, competent authorities, civil society organisations and insurers, for example through accessible information portals, commonly used networks (EU networks for practitioners), best practice information and guidance, additional training programmes, training materials and guidance on skills, as this could increase the pressure on ‘black sheep’ companies and, benefit companies that respect the law and would enable stakeholders, operators and the public to become more aware of the existence of the ELD regime and its enforcement and thus contribute to better prevention and remediation of environmental damages;
Amendment 54 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Regrets that environmental crime is one of the most prevalent criminal activities in the world, benefiting from low detection probability, low prosecution rates and low penalties for environmental damages; calls on the Member States to increase the level of expertise of prosecutors and judges in environmental crimes and its effects, with a view to more efficiently prosecuting environmental crime; calls on Member States to set up or reinforce specialised units within their national police services at the appropriate levels for the investigation of environmental offences and to provide them with sufficient human, financial and technical resources, with a view to reinforcing their inspection and enforcement capacity in combating environmental crime;
Amendment 55 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Amendment 57 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that one of the various causes of the insufficient harmonisation of the ELD is the failure to provide for the application of a standard administrative procedure for notifying competent authorities of imminent threats of or actual environmental damage; regrets therefore that there is no obligation to publish such notifications or information about how cases are dealt with; notes that some Member States have identified this limitation in their national legislation and have consequently set up databases for notifications, incidents and cases; points out, however, that the practice varies greatly from Member State to Member State and is rather limited; stresses that, the revised ELD should ensure that entities operating in the public interest, including NGOs and affected communities, have a full access to information and data and can play an effective role in commencing and pursuing environmental liability actions in the EU;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points outreiterates that reliable data on environmental incidents giving rise to the application of the ELD or other administrative, civil or criminal instruments should be collected and should be made public in order to establish whether a combination of different legal instruments could adequately respond to environmental harm, or whether serious gaps still exist that need to be remedied; asks for the establishment of a European register of cases of environmental damage governed by the ELD and calls the Commission and all the Member States to develop public available databases for reporting on ELD cases in order to create better trust in the ELD system and better implementation;
Amendment 68 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the ELD to be revised as soon as possible and to be transformed into a fully harmonised regulation in order to achieve a level playing field for EU industry; emphasises that EU rules for liability of companies for environmental damage are currently not providing a level playing field , thereby distorting the proper functioning of the EU’s internal market;
Amendment 72 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is of the opinion that enforcement should be harmonised and that an EU ELD task force made up of highly qualified experts and Commission officials should be created to support the Member States, upon request, with the implementation and enforcement of the directive on the one hand, and to support and advise victims of environmental damage on the available options for legal action at EU level on the other (comparable to SOLVIT); further calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of establishing an EU-based agency vested with monitoring and enforcement powers, in order to enhance legal certainty for operators, enhance uniform implementation of the EU environmental liability regime and deter incorrect application thereof across Member States;
Amendment 73 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Stresses the need to improve access to justice for victims of environmental harm, including through collective actions, representative actions and redress mechanisms; stresses that barriers to access to remedies should be lifted, including insufficient court powers to order effective redress; recognizes the importance of the reversal of the burden of proof as a necessary precondition for effective remedies in case of diffuse environmental damage; emphasises the key role of environmental NGOs in raising awareness and taking legal actions to ensure the respect of environmental laws; accordingly, stresses the need to improve access to justice for NGOs, notably in case of widespread pollution, including by removing litigation barriers to initiate legal actions, in particular related to legal standing and costs of litigation; further considers that, in order to generally improve access to justice, regulations prohibiting lawyers to charge result-based fees should be abrogated, victims of environmental corporate abuse should be given priority in bankruptcy proceedings, and third party funding of litigation should be allowed;
Amendment 76 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Stresses that the objective of reaching effective accountability for environmental damage can be significantly undermined when public participation is threatened by companies’ recourse to Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP) and other abusive legal claims; calls on the Commission to introduce additional preventive measures, procedural safeguards and exemplary sanctions against companies bringing abusive lawsuits aimed at deterring public participation and intimidating victims in the context of environmental damage;
Amendment 77 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9 c. Considers that the environmental liability framework should provide effective mediation and remedies to victims of environmental damage and associated human rights violations, including operational-level grievance mechanisms; believes that special protections should be provided to indigenous peoples, environmental whistle-blowers, and human rights defenders; also stresses that protection should in any event be granted to individuals obliged to leave their habitual home due, in whole or in part, to sudden or progressive business-induced environmental damages that adversely affect their life or living conditions;
Amendment 79 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 e (new)
Paragraph 9 e (new)
9 e. Considers that the framework should oblige companies to have an effective environmental reporting mechanism that should be transparent, accessible and trustworthy; Reiterates in this regard the need to strengthen standards in terms of mandatory disclosure of information by undertakings in the remit of the revision of Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on non-financial reporting, notably by including an enforcement and sanctioning mechanism to support the reporting requirements;
Amendment 80 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 f (new)
Paragraph 9 f (new)
9 f. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to set up protection and support schemes for the victims of environmental damage and to ensure their full access to justice, information and compensation; emphasises the key role of environmental NGOs in raising awareness, representing the victims’ interests, and taking legal action; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide them with the appropriate financial support;
Amendment 85 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that most definitions in the ELD should be further clarified and broaden, to make the directive fair and clear to all stakeholders, such as operators, competent authorities, civil society organisations and insurers and to keep pace with the rapid evolution of pollutants; welcomes therefore the current efforts to develop a common understanding document (CUD) on key ELD definitions and concepts; regrets, however, that the Commission and the ELD government expert groups did not reach an agreement on its format, meaning that the CUD remains a document produced by the consultancy which was hired by the Commission to support the implementation of the 2017-2020 Multi- annual ELD Work Programme;
Amendment 88 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Points out that the different interpretations and application of the “significance threshold” for environmental damage has been identified as a main reason for the uneven application of the ELD; calls, therefore, for a more consistent application and better clarification and guidance of the threshold of “significant damage” in the context of the ELD; calls for the clarification and harmonisation of the “significant” damage to biodiversity threshold and the criteria for its definition, and the alignment of the environmental liability regime to the Habitats Directive Article 6(2);
Amendment 90 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Further considers that diffuse form of pollution should also be effectively incorporated in a comprehensive revision of the liability framework; stresses in particular that companies and their subsidiaries whose activities notably result in the production, use or release of hazardous chemicals, nano-plastics, pesticides, CO2 and other greenhouse gases emissions, should also be held liable; further stresses that causality requirements should not constitute a hurdle to recognise liability in case of diffuse or cumulative damage, such as climate change or biodiversity loss; consequently calls on the Commission to make sure that the scope of its future proposal of Environmental Liability Regulation and ECD also covers diffuse forms of pollution or to propose a rapidly needed new legislation to establish a liability regime for diffuse pollution, consistently with the Polluter-Pays principle;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. AskCalls the Commission to undertake a study to establish whether extending the scope of the ELD to align it with other pieces of EU legislation, including the ECD, could limit short- and long-term damage to the environment, human health and air qualityextend the scope of the ELD strict liability to non- Annex III activities to cover all environmental damage, as well as to human health, such as air pollution by cars violating EU car emissions legislation so as to improve the effectiveness of the legislation in implementing the ‘polluter pays’ principle; considers that such extension of scope would streamline the ELD with other pieces of EU legislation on protecting human health and environment, including the ECD, and would facilitate adding provisions to the ELD, such as including a requirement to carry out preventive measures and emergency remedial action, either in the directive itself or in national law implementing it; asks the Commission, furthermore, to assess wthether the precautionary principle approach properly presupposes potentially dangerous risks or effects; potential damage that the so-called industry-led ‘innovation principle’ can have on the short and long term, and the danger it poses to the established precautionary principle and its ability to limit liability in environmental damage;
Amendment 95 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Notes that the activities listed in Annex III do not sufficiently cover the sectors that could potentially give rise to environmental damage; points out that there are activities with potential negative impacts on biodiversity and the environment, such as the pipeline of transport of hazardous substances outside of industrial establishments covered by Annex III, mining, the introduction of invasive alien species and shale gas operations, that are currently not covered by the requirement for strict liability;
Amendment 99 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11 d. Notes that in Article 1 ELD, the framework of environmental liabilityshould be broadened to include environmental rehabilitation and ecological restoration to the baseline condition after occupational activities have ended, even when environmental damage is caused by activities or emissions expressly authorised by the competent authorities;
Amendment 102 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 g (new)
Paragraph 11 g (new)
11 g. Stresses that pure environmental damage should entail administrative, civil and criminal liability of responsible companies; also stresses that those forms of liability coexist with other liability regimes in business law, such as consumer law or competition law, which can also be triggered by some companies’ conducts resulting in environmental damage;
Amendment 105 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 j (new)
Paragraph 11 j (new)
11 j. Calls on the Commission to take action, including legal action where applicable, to ensure that the lengthy procedures in Member States deciding on liability for environmental burdens do not jeopardise the objective of high level of environmental protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment as enshrined in EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 108 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 m (new)
Paragraph 11 m (new)
Amendment 116 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to assess whether it would be appropriate to introduceintroduce a secondary liability regime, that is parental and chain liability for damage caused to human health and the environment20 ; _________________ 20See, for instance, Judgment of the Court of Justice of 10 September 2009, Akzo Nobel NV and Others v Commission of the European Communities, C-97/08 B, ECLI:EU:C:2009:536.
Amendment 117 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. believes that Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) and Corporate Environmental Responsibility (CER) could play a complementary role to environmental liability, as duly compliance with CSR and CER can reduce the likelihood of environmental harm; considers important in this sense that these commitments should be connected to mandatory obligations towards sustainable value creation, including the enforcing of non-financial reporting obligations;
Amendment 119 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. considers that a new legislation is urgently needed in order to establish clear, robust and enforceable cross- sectoral requirements on business enterprises to respect human rights, good governance and the environment and to carry out due diligence; stresses that such legislation should follow a cross- commodity approach, apply to all economic sectors in the supply chain, including the financial sector, both upstream and downstream, be accompanied by a robust reporting, disclosure and enforcement mechanism, including effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions for non-compliance;
Amendment 120 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is of the opinion that the optional permit and Calls for the revised environmental liability regime to restrict the scope of application of the ‘permit defence’ and the ‘state- of- the art defences should only be maintained when a company can prove that it could not have known about the danger of its activity (reversed burden of proof)’ under the ELD, also through a reversal of the burden of proof upon moderators, in order to promote the ‘polluter pays’ principle while improving the effectiveness of same environmental liability regime;
Amendment 129 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. AsksCalls on the Commission to look into the possibility of introducinge a mandatory financial security system (covering insurance, bank guarantees, company pools and bonds or funds) with a maximum threshold per case, aiming to prevent taxpayers from having to bear the costs resulting from remediation of environmental damage; asks the Commission, in addition, to develop a harmonised EU methodology for calculating the maximum liability threshold, taking into account the activity and the impact on the environmenthighlights that insurance cannot be designed to limit liability, but only to address costs of clean-up;
Amendment 133 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15 b. Calls on the Commission to include in its legislative proposal revising the ELD regime a fund for ELD liabilities at EU or national level; also calls on the Commission to study the possibility of using this fund as a basis for a renewed regime for socio-environmental protection;
Amendment 137 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Reiterates that according to the ELD, persons adversely affected by environmental damage should be entitled to ask the competent authorities to take action; believes in this regard that a compensatory collective redress mechanism should be available to any individual or organisation that has suffered due to environmental damage or impairment of right within the scope of the ELD;
Amendment 138 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16 b. Welcomes the Commission legislative proposal amending the Aarhus Regulation1367/2006 (COM(2020) 642 final) to allow for better public scrutiny of EU acts affecting the environment; taking into account that the European law stipulates that European citizens should be guaranteed effective and timely access to justice(Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Regulation, Article 6 TEU and relevant provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights) and that the costs of the environmental harm should be borne by the polluter (Article 191TFEU), calls on the Council in its capacity as a co-legislator for the effective implementation of the third pillar of the Aarhus Convention to guarantee access to courts for natural persons and NGOs for representative action to directly file a lawsuit against an operator potentially liable for environmental harm;
Amendment 143 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Is of the opinion that in cases of extremely widespread pollution, not just environmental liability instruments, but a multitude of instruments, including administrative measures, financial penalties and in some cases criminal prosecution, should be applied to remedy the problem; notes that criminal penalties alone are often ineffective as they may lead to large dismissals of environmental cases especially in Member States where there is no criminal liability of the corporate entity; also notes that in many Member States administrative financial penalties are increasingly used; calls therefore on the Commission to facilitate, and on Member States to use, administrative fines as a complementary tool alongside criminal sanctions;
Amendment 149 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Considers in particular that in cases of serious diffuse pollution and of large-scale incidents, the strict liability of the responsible company should be established and result in sanctions which may include temporary or definitive closure of the responsible company or its premises, and may entail the directors’ and board members’ personal liability;
Amendment 150 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Calls for the scope of the ECD to be reviewed to ensure that it covers all relevant environmental legislation taking into account new types and patterns of environmental crime, including illegal logging and timber trade, illegal fishing, human-made fires and carbon credit fraud and all activities that contribute to cover-up environmental crimes;
Amendment 152 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Calls for minimum rules under the ECD with regard to the definition of sanctions and on the Commission to issue guidance on what constitutes effective, dissuasive and proportionate sanctions and a uniform application of sanctions in the EU and minimum standards for national authorities on the frequency and quality of checks on operators; the ECD should include requirements for Member States on data collection, publication and reporting, while using synergies with existing reporting obligations for Member States under the EU sectoral legislation listed in the annexes to the Directive;
Amendment 153 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Deplores the lack of effective implementation and enforcement of EU acts that aim to establish the criminal liability of legal persons for environmental offences and remediate environmental damages resulting therefrom; Recalls that there are cases of public institutions or state enterprises responsible for action infringing the environmental legislation which could constitute criminal offence; Calls on the Member States to effectively apply the provision on criminal prosecution of the respective private persons acting in the name of a legal entity;
Amendment 155 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Calls for further clarification and guidance on the interpretation of some legal terms of the ECD, such as “substantial damage”, “non-negligible quantity”, “negligible quantity” and “negligible impact”, “dangerous activity” and “significant deterioration” to ensure consistent application in individual Member States and facilitate cross-border cooperation;
Amendment 156 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of a legislative proposal for the crime of ecocide and calls on the EU and Member States to work in order to extend the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court to the ecocide as well; this extension would make it possible to recognize that large- scale environmental crimes are comparable to voluntary violations of human rights or to outright warlike actions;
Amendment 159 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 e (new)
Paragraph 17 e (new)
17 e. calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of establishing a European Environmental Criminal Court with powers similar to those of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, which enforces the 'polluter pays' principle, including compensation for victims;
Amendment 169 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 e (new)
Paragraph 18 e (new)
18 e. Stresses the importance of independent auditors to ensure that businesses behave in an environmentally sustainable way; calls on the Commission and the Member States to encourage European companies to regularly conduct independent environmental audits; suggests that Recommendation 2001/331 which provides in detail how environmental inspections should be conducted should be transposed into a binding document or regulation;
Amendment 170 #
2020/2027(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 f (new)
Paragraph 18 f (new)
18 f. Considers that companies convicted for environmental crimes should not been allowed to benefit from any of the measures foreseen for registrants into the transparency register; suggests, to this end, to revise the scope and the code of conduct of the transparency register in order to include provisions on the removal of companies convicted for environmental crimes;
Amendment 3 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the right to fair trial is a fundamental right which also applies toand legally binding right enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights for law enforcement of the lawpurposes;
Amendment 10 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12 a (new)
Citation 12 a (new)
- having regard to the Council of Europe’s European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their Environment, adopted on 4 December 2018,
Amendment 14 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and related technologies willmay contribute to the prevention of certain types of crime and, therefore, to the reducing of crime rates,; whereas their use of, when applied to statistical data analytics in crime analysis and prevention, and the operation of criminal justice systems; may provide useful support to the investigative activities of police authorities, whilst ensuring compliance with procedural safeguards concerning the protection of privacy, as enshrined in the rule of law and legislation on the protection of personal data, pursuant to the GDPR and in particular to Article 22 thereof, according to which everyone has the right not to be subject to a decision which produces legal effects concerning them, or significantly affects them, based solely on automated data processing designed to assess certain aspects of their personality; whereas, moreover, the use of such technologies may help improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the operation of criminal justice systems, though such algorithms - so-called automated decision systems - should not be used to replace human minds in final decisions, in order to avoid deterministic approaches and ensure that all decisions are based on the free judgment of those who must judge, and whose decisions must always be justifiable, responsible and free of prejudice;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas AI can be seen as the ability of a system to correctly interpret external data, to learn from such data, and to use those learnings to achieve specific goals and tasks through flexible adaptation; Whereas the key components of development in AI are the availability of vast quantities of: data, computing power, and human capital and talent;
Amendment 24 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
A b. whereas, despite continuing advances in computer processing speed and memory capacity, there are as yet no programs that can match human flexibility over wider domains or in tasks requiring understanding of context or critical analysis; whereas, some AI applications have attained the performance levels of human experts and professionals in performing certain specific tasks, and can provide results in a completely different speed and scale;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
A c. whereas several Member States use the application of embedded artificial intelligence (AI) systems in the field of law enforcement;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the importance of consideringat the ethical and operational implications of the use of AI and related technologies within criminal justice systems; must be closely linked to compliance with rigorous ethical principles, such as those laid down in the Council of Europe's 'European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and their environment', to which public and private entities responsible for the initial design and development of AI tools and services should adhere, so that all social stakeholders can have full information on the corporate structures of companies that produce AI programmes;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas the use of AI technology should be developed in such a way as to put people at its center and therefore to be worth of public trust;
Amendment 36 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas AI systems always have to be in the service of humans and have the ultimate safety valve of being designed so that they can always be shut down by a human operator;
Amendment 40 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines the importance of being ableright of the parties to access the data collection process and that relating to prognostic assessments useful for crime prevention police, to the cataloguing and evaluation of criminal evidence and to preventive assessments of whether a suspect might be a danger to society; underlines, in addition, the right of the parties to access AI-produced or AI- assisted outputs for notification procedures and the role of AI and related technologies in criminal law enforcement and crime prevention; recalls the importance of questions related to governance, transparency and accountabilityaccountability and transparency, in keeping with the Parliament resolution on robotics of 2017, which stressed that it should always be possible to supply the rationale behind any decision taken with the aid of AI that can have an impact on one or more persons’ lives; is of the view, therefore, that it is vital also to provide for a rule that regulates the principle of the independence of programmers, since it is they who prepare not only the selection of data and information to be processed and upon which to base the algorithms, but also the assessment criteria that inform and produce a decision;
Amendment 47 #
2020/2016(INI)
E a. whereas the development and operation of AI systems for police and judicial authorities involves the contribution of multiple individuals, organisations, machine components, software algorithms, and human users in often complex and challenging environments;
Amendment 51 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas allocating and distributing responsibility between humans and machines is increasingly difficult; whereas ultimately it is the responsibility of the Member States to guarantee the full respect of fundamental rights when AI systems are used in the field of law enforcement;
Amendment 52 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
F b. whereas the relationship between protecting fundamental rights and effective policing must always be an essential element in the discussions on whether and how AI should be used by law enforcement sector, where decisions may have long lasting consequences on the life and freedom of individuals;
Amendment 59 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the recommendations of the Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on AI for a proportionate use of biometric recognition technology and, regulated on the basis of the principles of human dignity, prevention of harm, fairness and explicability of use, as enshrined in the GDPR legislation on the protection of personal data; suggests that the application of such technology must be clearly warranted under existing laws and urges the Commission to assess how to effectively incorporate these recommendations;
Amendment 65 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
H a. whereas AI has the potential to be a permanent part of our criminal justice ecosystem by providing investigative analysis and assistance;
Amendment 67 #
2020/2016(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers it necessary to clarify whetherthat law enforcement decisions cannot be delegated to AI and stresses the need to develop codes of conduct for the design and use of AIspecific mandatory rules of conduct for public and private entities responsible for the design and use of AI, to ensure that they adhere to the principles of transparency and clarity relating to the processes for developing mathematical models and predictive algorithms, while complying with the requirement for independent verification of the quality and reliability of the results achieved, in terms of acquiring and assessing evidence - especially circumstantial evidence - beyond all reasonable doubt, in order to help law enforcers and judicial authorities; refers to the ongoing work in the Committee on Legal Affairs.
Amendment 85 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. recalls that the EU has already established data protection standards for law enforcement, which form the foundation for any future regulation in AI; recalls that processing of personal data must be lawful and fair; the purposes of processing must be specified, explicit and legitimate; must be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose for which is it processed; be accurate and kept up to date (inaccurate data should, subject to the purpose for which it would otherwise be retained, be correcte dor erased); should be kept for no longer than is necessary and processed in a secure manner;
Amendment 87 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reaffirms that all AI solutions for law enforcement and the judiciary also need to fully respect the principles of non- discrimination, human dignity, prevention of damage, transparency, impartiality and accuracy, fairness and explainability of the use of biometric recognition technologies, guarantee of the human control by the user, freedom of movement, the presumption of innocence and right of defence, freedom of expression and information, freedom of assembly and of association, equality before the law, and the right to an effective remedy and a fair trial;
Amendment 94 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. notes that the use of biometric data, such as for facial recognition technologies, relates more broadly to the principle of the right to human dignity; human dignity is the basis of all fundamental rights guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights; The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has confirmed in its case law that the fundamental right to dignity is part of EU law, therefore biometric data, including facial images, must be processed in a way that respects human dignity;
Amendment 106 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Underlines the right of the parties to access the data collection process and that relating to prognostic assessments useful for crime prevention police, to the cataloguing and evaluation of criminal evidence and to preventive assessments of whether a suspect might be a danger to society, to the risk of recidivism and the output produced or obtained through AI for notification procedures, as well as the role of AI and related technologies in criminal law enforcement and crime prevention;
Amendment 138 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Highlights the power asymmetry between those who develop and employ AI technologies and those who interact and are subject to them; it is, therefore, essential also to provide for a rule that ensures the transparency of the corporate structures of companies that produce and manage AI systems and institutionalise the principle of independence of the programmers, since it is they who prepare not only the selection of data and information to be processed at the basis of the algorithms, but also the assessment criteria that inform and produce a decision;
Amendment 143 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. stresses that only a robust European AI governance enable the necessary operationalisation of fundamental rights principles;
Amendment 145 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers it necessary to create a clear and fair regime for assigning legal responsibility for the potential adverse consequences produced by these advanced digital technologies; Recognises the challenges to correctly locate the responsibility for potential harm, given the complexity of development and operation of AI systems;
Amendment 149 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Highlights how individuals have become overly trusting in the seemingly objective and scientific nature of AI tools and thus fail to consider the possibility of their results being incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant, with potentially grave adverse consequences specifically in the area of law enforcement and justice; Emphasises the over-reliance on the results provided for by AI systems, and notes with concern the lack of confidence and knowledge, by authorities, to question or override an algorithmic recommendation;
Amendment 156 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Underlines that in judicial and law enforcement contexts, the final decision always needs to be taken by a human, who can be held accountable for the decisions made, and include the possibility of a recourse for a remedy; it is necessary to prevent the use of algorithms – so-called automated decision systems – can replace human minds in final decisions, in order to avoid deterministic approaches and ensure the formation of the free judgment of judicial authorities, and whose decisions must always be justifiable, responsible and free of prejudices;
Amendment 160 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for algorithmic explainability and transparency in order to ensure that the development, deployment and use of AI systems for judiciary and law enforcement comply with fundamental rights, and are trusted by citizens, as well as in order to ensure that results generated by AI algorithms can be rendered intelligible to users and to those subject to these systems, and that there is transparency on the source data and how the system arrived at a certain conclusion; on that note, it is necessary to develop specific mandatory rules of conduct for public and private entities responsible for the design and use of AI, to ensure that they adhere to the principles of transparency and clarity relating to the processes for developing mathematical models and predictive algorithms, while complying with the requirement for independent verification of the quality and reliability of the results achieved, in terms of acquiring and assessing evidence - especially circumstantial evidence - beyond all reasonable doubt;
Amendment 164 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Calls for, in order to guarantee the algorithmic explainability and transparency of law enforcement AI systems, only such tools to be allowed to be purchased by the law enforcement in the Union, which algorithms and logic are open, to at least the police forces themselves, that can be audited, evaluated and vetted by them, and not closed and labelled proprietary by the vendors;
Amendment 166 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11 b. considers that the use and collection of any biometric data for remote identification purposes, for example by conducting facial recognition in public places, as well as at automatic border control gates used for border checks at airports, may pose specific risks to fundamental rights; the implications of which could vary considerably depending on the purpose, context and scope of use;
Amendment 171 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls for a compulsory fundamental rights impact assessment to be conducted prior to the implementation or deployment of any AI systems for law enforcement or judiciary, in order to assess any potential risks to fundamental rights; Underlines that this could oftentimes be built upon the mandatory Data Protection Impact Assessments;
Amendment 198 #
2020/2016(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls for the Fundamental Rights Agency, in collaboration with the European Data Protection Board and the European Data Protection Supervisor to draft comprehensive guidelines for the development, use and deployment of AI applications and solutions for the use by law enforcement and judicial authorities;
Amendment 96 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Responsible and diligent behaviour by providers of intermediary services is essential for a safe, predictable and trusted online environment and for allowing Union citizens and other persons to exercise their fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘Charter’), in particular the freedom of expression and information and, the freedom to conduct a business, andprivacy and personal data protection, the right to non-discrimination and access to justice.
Amendment 112 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) For reasons of clarity, it should also be specified that this Regulation is without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council,31 , Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32 and Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC33 as well as Union law on consumer protection, in particular Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council34 , Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council35 and Directive 93/13/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council36 , as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council37 , Directive 2013/11/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, and on the protection of personal data, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council.38 The protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data is solely governed by the rules of Union law on that subject, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive 2002/58/EC. This Regulation is also without prejudice to the rules of Union law on working conditions. _________________ 30Regulation (EU) 2019/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 1). 31 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57). 32Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37. 33Regulation […/…] on temporary derogation from certain provisions of Directive 2002/58/EC. 34 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to- consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) 35Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. 36Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts. 37Directive (EU) 2019/2161 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directives 98/6/EC, 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the better enforcement and modernisation of Union consumer protection rules 38Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1).
Amendment 124 #
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 also covers information relating toand cover 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 relateis not in compliance with Union law since it refers 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 149 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) In order to benefit from the exemption from liability for hosting services, the provider should, upon obtaining actual knowledge or awareness of illegal content, act expeditiously to remove or to disable access to that content. The removal or disabling of access should be undertaken in the observance of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including the principle of freedom of expression. The provider can obtain such actual knowledge or awareness through, in particular, its own-initiative investigations or notices submitted to it by individuals or entities in accordance with this Regulation in so far as those notices are sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated to allow a diligent economic operator to reasonably identify, assess and where appropriate act against the allegedly illegal content.
Amendment 158 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to create legal certainty and not to discourage activities aimed at detecting, identifying and acting against illegal content that providers of intermediary services may undertake on a voluntary basis, it should be clarified that the mere fact that providers undertake such activities does not lead to the unavailability of the exemptions from liability set out in this Regulation, provided those activities are carried out in good faith and in a diligent manner and accompanied by additional safeguards. In addition, it is appropriate to clarify that the mere fact that those providers take measures, in good faith, to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation as regards the implementation of their terms and conditions, should not lead to the unavailability of those exemptions from liability. Therefore, any such activities and measures that a given provider may have taken should not be taken into account when determining whether the provider can rely on an exemption from liability, in particular as regards whether the provider provides its service neutrally and can therefore fall within the scope of the relevant provision, without this rule however implying that the provider can necessarily rely thereon.
Amendment 168 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Providers of intermediary services should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of a general nature. This does not concern monitoring obligations in a specific case and, in particular, does not affect orders by national authorities in accordance with national legislation, in accordance with the conditions established in this Regulation. Nothing in this Regulation should be construed as an imposition of a general monitoring obligation or active fact-finding obligation, or as a general obligation for providers to take proactive measures to relation to illegal content or as an obligation to use automated content- filtering tools.
Amendment 178 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) The territorial scope of such orders to act against illegal content should be clearly set out on the basis of the applicable Union or national law enabling the issuance of the order and should not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objectives. In that regard, the national judicial or administrative authority issuing the order should balance the objective that the order seeks to achieve, in accordance with the legal basis enabling its issuance, with the rights and legitimate interests of all third parties that may be affected by the order, in particular their fundamental rights under the Charter. In addition, where the order referring to the specific information may have effects beyond the territory of the Member State of the authority concerned, the authority should assess whether the information at issue is likely to constitute illegal content in other Member States concerned and, where relevant, take account of the relevant rules of Union law or international law and the interests of international comity. In this context and to maintain proportionality, orders addressed to a provider that has its main establishment or legal representation in another Member State or outside the Union should be limited to the Member State issuing the order, unless the legal basis for the order is directly applicable Union law.
Amendment 188 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) In order to facilitate smooth and efficient communications relating to matters covered by this Regulation, providers of intermediary services should be required to establish a single point of contact and to publish relevant and up-to- date information relating to their point of contact, including the languages to be used in such communications. The point of contact can also be used by trusted flaggers and by professional entities which are under a specific relationship with the provider of intermediary services. In contrast to the legal representative, the point of contact should serve operational purposes and should not necessarily have to have a physical location .
Amendment 190 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Whilst the freedom of contract of providers of intermediary services should in principle be respected, it is appropriate to set certain rules on the content, application and enforcement of the terms and conditions of those providers in the interests of transparency, the protection of recipients of the service and the avoidance of unfair or arbitrary outcomes. In particular, it is important to ensure that terms and conditions are fair, non- discriminatory and transparent, and are drafted in a clear and unambiguous language in line with applicable Union law. The terms and conditions should include information on any policies, procedures, measures and tools used for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making, human review, the legal consequences to be faced by the users for knowingly storing or uploading illegal content as well as on the right to terminate the use of the service. Providers of intermediary services should also provide recipients of services with a concise and easily readable summary of the main elements of the terms and conditions, including the remedies available.
Amendment 201 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Providers of hosting services play a particularly important role in tackling illegal content online, as they store information provided by and at the request of the recipients of the service and typically give other recipients access thereto, sometimes on a large scale. It is important that all providers of hosting services, regardless of their size, put in place easily accessible, comprehensive and user-friendly notice and action mechanisms that facilitate the notification of specific items of information that the notifying party considers to be illegal content to the provider of hosting services concerned ('notice'), pursuant to which that provider can decide whether or not it agrees with that assessment and wishes to remove or disable access to that content ('action'). Provided the requirements on notices are met, it should be possible for individuals or entities to notify multiple specific items of allegedly illegal content through a single notice. The obligation to put in place notice and action mechanisms should apply, for instance, to file storage and sharing services, web hosting services, advertising servers and paste bins, in as far as they qualify as providers of hosting services covered by this Regulation.
Amendment 212 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) Where a hosting service provider decides to remove or disable information provided by a recipient of the service, for instance following receipt of a notice or acting on its own initiative, including through the use of automated means, that provider should inform the recipient of its decision, the reasons for its decision and the available redress possibilities to contest the decision, in view of the negative consequences that such decisions may have for the recipient, including as regards the exercise of its fundamental right to freedom of expression. That obligation should apply irrespective of the reasons for the decision, in particular whether the action has been taken because the information notified is considered to be illegal content or incompatible with the applicable terms and conditions. Available recourses to challenge the decision of the hosting service provider should always include judicial redress.
Amendment 221 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) Recipients of the service should be able to easily and effectively contest certain decisions of online platforms that negatively affect them. Therefore, online platforms should be required to provide for internal complaint-handling systems, which meet certain conditions aimed at ensuring that the systems are easily accessible and lead to swift and fair outcomes. In addition, provision should be made for the possibility of out-of-court dispute settlement of disputes, including those that could not be resolved in satisfactory manner through the internal complaint-handling systems, by certified bodies that have the requisite independence, means and expertise to carry out their activities in a fair, swift and cost- effective manner. Dispute resolution proceedings should be concluded within a reasonable period of time. The possibilities to contest decisions of online platforms thus created should complement, yet leave unaffected in all respects, the possibility to seek judicial redress in accordance with the laws of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 227 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) Action against illegal content can be taken more quickly and reliably where online platforms take the necessary measures to ensure that notices submitted by trusted flaggers through the notice and action mechanisms required by this Regulation are treated with priority, without prejudice to the requirement to process and decide upon all notices submitted under those mechanisms in a timely, diligent and objective manner. Such trusted flagger status should only be awarded to entities, and not individuals, that have demonstrated, among other things, that they have particular expertise and competence in tackling illegal content in a designated area of expertise, that they represent collective, non-commercial interests and that they work in a diligent and objective manner. Such entities can be public in nature, such as, for terrorist content, internet referral units of national law enforcement authorities or of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (‘Europol’) or they can be non-governmental organisations and semi- public bodies, such as the organisations part of the INHOPE network of hotlines for reporting child sexual abuse material and organisations committed to notifying illegal racist and xenophobic expressions online. For intellectual property rights, organisations of industry and of right- holders could be awarded trusted flagger status, where they have demonstrated that they meet the applicable conditions. The rules of this Regulation on trusted flaggers should not be understood to prevent online platforms from giving similar treatment to notices submitted by entities or individuals that have not been awarded trusted flagger status under this Regulation, from otherwise cooperating with other entities, in accordance with the applicable law, including this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council.43 _________________ 43Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and replacing and repealing Council Decisions 2009/371/JHA, 2009/934/JHA, 2009/935/JHA, 2009/936/JHA and 2009/968/JHA, OJ L 135, 24.5.2016, p. 53
Amendment 246 #
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. Given the significant risks that arise from targeted advertising, including wthen this is based on profiling amplification of illegal or harmful content and other risks associated with the reliance on pervasive tracking and data mining, targeting of advertising based on personal data should be prohibited. 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. In this context, it is important to highlight that consent to targeted advertising should not be considered as freely given, specific and thus valid if access to the service is made conditional on processing of personal data and profiling techniques outside of the control of the user. This Regulation 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 274 #
2020/0361(COD)
(62) A core part of a very large online platform’s business is the manner in which information is prioritised and presented on its online interface to facilitate and optimise access to information for the recipients of the service. This is done, for example, by algorithmically suggesting, ranking and prioritising information, distinguishing through text or other visual representations, or otherwise curating information provided by recipients. Such recommender systems can have a significant impact on the ability of recipients to retrieve and interact with information online. They also play an important role in the amplification of certain messages, the viral dissemination of information and the stimulation of online behaviour. Consequently, very large online platforms should ensure that recipients are appropriately informed, and can influence the information presented to them. They should clearly present the main parameters for such recommender systems in an easily comprehensible manner to ensure that the recipients understand how information is prioritised for them. They should also ensure that the recipients enjoy alternative options for the main parameters, including at least one default options that areis not based on profiling of the recipient and alternative, third-party recommender systems where technically possible.
Amendment 290 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65 a (new)
Recital 65 a (new)
(65 a) Recipients of a service are often locked in to existing platforms due to network effects, which significantly limits user choice. In order to facilitate free choice of recipients between different services, it is therefore important to consider interoperability for industry- standard features of very large online platforms, such as core messaging functionality or image-sharing services. Such interoperability would empower recipients to choose a service based on its functionality and features such as security, privacy, and data processing standards, rather than its existing user base.
Amendment 292 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) To facilitate the effective and consistent application of the obligations in this Regulation that may require implementation through technological means, it is important to promote voluntary industry standards covering certain technical procedures, where the industry can help develop standardised means to comply with this Regulation, such as allowing the submission of notices, including through application programming interfaces, or about the interoperability of advertisement repositories. Such standards could in particular be useful for relatively small providers of intermediary services. The standards could distinguish between different types of illegal content or different types of intermediary services, as appropriate.
Amendment 365 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 5 – point i a (new)
(i a) Directive 2006/123/EC
Amendment 383 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) ‘illegal content’ means any information,, which, in itself or by its reference to an activity, including the sale of products or provision of services is not in compliance with Union law or the law of a Member State, irrespective of the precise subject matter or nature of that law;
Amendment 402 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
(q) ‘terms and conditions’ means all terms and conditions or specifications provided by the provider of intermediary services, irrespective of their name or form, which govern the contractual relationship between the provider of intermediary services and the recipients of the services.
Amendment 405 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
(q a) ‘manifestly illegal content’ means any information which is unmistakably and without requiring in-depth examination in breach of legal provisions regulating the legality of content online.
Amendment 435 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Providers of intermediary services shall not be deemed ineligible for the exemptions from liability referred to in Articles 3, 4 and 5 solely because they carry out voluntary own-initiative investigations or other activities aimed at detecting, identifying and removing, oror temporarily disabling of access to, manifestly illegal content, or take the necessary measures to comply with the requirements of Union law, including those set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 436 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Providers of intermediary services shall notify the competent judicial or administrative authority and the recipient of the service concerned about detection and/or disabling of access to manifestly illegal content without undue delay; notified authorities shall authorise the permanent removal of the content notified;
Amendment 437 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Voluntary own-initiative investigations shall not lead to ex-ante control measures based on automated content moderation tools.
Amendment 438 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Providers of intermediary services shall ensure that such measures are accompanied by appropriate safeguards, such as human oversight, documentation, traceability, transparency of algorithms used or additional measures to ensure the accuracy, fairness, transparency and non- discrimination of voluntary own-initiative investigations.
Amendment 441 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
No general obligation to monitor the information which providers of intermediary services transmit or store, nor actively to seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity shall be imposed on those providers. Providers of intermediary services shall not be obliged to use automated tools for content moderation.
Amendment 452 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
— a statement of reasons explaining why the information is illegal content, by reference to the specific provision of Union or national law infringed with due regard to fundamental rights of the recipient of the service concerned;
Amendment 454 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
- identification of the competent judicial or administrative authority;
Amendment 455 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 b (new)
- reference to the legal basis for the order;
Amendment 457 #
2020/0361(COD)
(b) the territorial scope of the order, addressed to a provider that has its main establishment in the Member State issuing the order, on the basis of the applicable rules of Union and national law, including the Charter, and, where relevant, general principles of international law, does not exceed what is strictly necessary to achieve its objective;
Amendment 460 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(b a) the territorial scope of an order addressed to a provider that has its main establishment or legal representation in another Member State or outside the Union, is limited to the territory of the Member State issuing the order, unless the legal basis for the order is directly applicable Union law;
Amendment 496 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1
— a statement of reasons explaining the objective for which the information is required and why the requirement to provide the information is necessary and proportionate to determine compliance by the recipients of the intermediary services with applicable Union or national rules, with due regard to fundamental rights of the recipient of the service concerned, unless such a statement cannot be provided for reasons related to the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences;
Amendment 499 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 a (new)
- identification of the competent judicial or administrative authority;
Amendment 501 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 b (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – indent 1 b (new)
- reference to the legal basis for the order;
Amendment 513 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. The obligations under this Article shall not oblige providers of intermediary services to introduce new tracking of profiling techniques for recipients of the service in order to comply with orders to provide information.
Amendment 534 #
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 by the provider of the intermediary service for the purpose of content moderation, including algorithmic decision-making and human review. It shall be set out in clear and unambiguous language and shall be publicly available in an easily accessible format and include a searchable archive of previous versions of the provider’s terms and conditions.
Amendment 547 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Providers of intermediary services shall provide recipients of services with a concise and easily readable summary of the terms and conditions. That summary shall identify the main elements of the information requirements, including the possibility of easily opting-out from optional clauses and the remedies available.
Amendment 581 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Amendment 584 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13 b (new)
Article 13b Online interface design 1. Providers of intermediary services shall refrain from subverting or impairing autonomous decision-making or free choice of a recipient of a service through the design, functioning or operation of online interfaces or a part thereof, such as but not limited to: (a) according visual prominence to one option when asking the recipient of the service for consent or a decision; (b) repeatedly requesting consent to data processing or requesting a change to a setting or configuration of the service after the recipient of the service has already made her choice; (c) making the procedure of cancelling a service more difficult than signing up to it. 2. A choice or decision by the recipient of the service using an online interface that does not comply with the requirements of this article shall not constitute consent in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. 3. The Commission shall be empowered to publish guidelines indicating specific design choices that qualify as subverting or impairing the autonomy, decision-making processes or choices of the recipient of the service.
Amendment 588 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Providers of hosting services shall put mechanisms in place to allow any individual or entity to notify them of the presence on their service of specific items of information that the individual or entity considers to be illegal content. Those mechanisms shall be easy to access, user- friendly, clearly visible on the hosting service interface, and allow for the submission of notices exclusively by electronic means and in the language of the individual or entity submitting a notice.
Amendment 589 #
2020/0361(COD)
2. The mechanisms referred to in paragraph 1 shall be such as to facilitate the submission of sufficiently precise and adequately substantiated notices, on the basis of which a diligent economic operator can identify the illegality of the content in question. To that end, the providers shall take the necessary measures to enable and facilitate the submission of notices containing all of the following elements:
Amendment 593 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) an sufficiently substantiated explanation of the reasons why the individual or entity considers the information in question to be illegal content;
Amendment 597 #
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 particularsuch as the exact URL or URLs, and, where necessary, additional information enabling the identification of the illegal content;
Amendment 606 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. Notices that include the elements referred to in paragraph 2 on the basis of which a diligent economic operator can identify the illegality of the content in question shall be considered to give rise to actual knowledge or awareness for the purposes of Article 5 in respect of the specific item of information concerned.
Amendment 639 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a Content moderation 1. Providers of hosting services shall not use ex-ante control measures for content moderation based on automated tools or ex-ante filtering of content. Where providers of hosting services use automated tools for content moderation, they shall ensure qualified human oversight for any action taken and that legal content which does not infringe the terms and conditions set out by the provider is not affected. This paragraph shall not apply to moderating information which has most likely been provided by automated tools. 2. Providers of hosting services shall act in a fair, transparent, coherent, predictable, non-discriminatory, diligent, non-arbitrary and proportionate manner when moderating content, with due regard to the rights and legitimate interests of all parties involved, including the fundamental rights of the recipients of the service. Content moderation practices shall be proportionate to the type and volume of content, relevant and limited to what is necessary for the purposes for which the content is moderated. 3. Providers of hosting services shall not subject recipients of the service to discriminatory practices, exploitation or exclusion for the purposes of content moderation, such as removal of user- generated content based on appearance, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, religion or belief, disability, age, pregnancy or upbringing of children, language or social class.
Amendment 642 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 b (new)
Article 15 b (new)
Article 15b Content moderation staff Providers of hosting services shall ensure adequate qualification of staff working on content moderation, including ongoing training on the applicable legislation and fundamental rights. The provider shall also provide appropriate working conditions including the opportunity to seek professional support, qualified psychological assistance and qualified legal advice.
Amendment 656 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) decisions toagainst or in favour of removeal or disableing of access to the information;
Amendment 657 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) decisions toagainst or in favour of suspendsion or terminateion of the provision of the service, in whole or in part, to the recipients;
Amendment 659 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) decisions toagainst or in favour of suspendsion or terminateion of the recipients’ account.
Amendment 663 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) decisions against or in favour of demonetising content provided by the recipients;
Amendment 665 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(cb) decisions against or in favour of applying additional labels or information to content provided by the recipients;
Amendment 668 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)
(cc) decisions that adversely affect the recipient’s access to significant features of the platform’s regular services;
Amendment 669 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)
(cd) decisions not to act upon a notice.
Amendment 677 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Online platforms shall ensure that any relevant information in relation to decisions taken by the internal complaint- handling mechanism is available to recipients of the service for the purpose of seeking redress through an out-of-court dispute settlement body pursuant to Article 18 or before a court.
Amendment 681 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The first subparagraph is without prejudice to the right of the recipient concerned to redress against the decision before a court in accordance with the applicable law. Judicial redress against a decision by an out-of-court dispute settlement body shall be directed against the online platform, not the settlement body.
Amendment 684 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State where the out-of-court dispute settlement body is established shall, at the request of that body, certify the body, where the body has demonstrated that it meets all of the following conditions:
Amendment 687 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) it is impartial and independent of online platforms and recipients of the service provided by the online platforms, including aspects such as financial resources and personnel;
Amendment 696 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) the dispute settlement takes place in accordance with clear and fair, fair and publicly available rules of procedure.
Amendment 697 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Digital Services Coordinator shall, where applicable, specify in the certificate the particular issues to which the body’s expertise relates and the official language or languages of the Union in which the body is capable of settling disputes, as referred to in points (b) and (d) of the first subparagraph, respectively. Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall conclude dispute resolution proceedings within a reasonable period of time.
Amendment 701 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Certified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies shall make information on the fees, or the mechanisms used to determine the fees, known to the recipient of the services and the online platform concerned before engaging in the dispute settlementpublicly available.
Amendment 703 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Decisions reached by an out-of- court dispute settlement body shall not be disputable by another out-of-court dispute settlement body and the resolution of a particular dispute may only be discussed in one out-of-court dispute settlement body.
Amendment 711 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Online platforms shall take the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that notices on manifestly illegal content submitted by trusted flaggers through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, are processed and decided upon with priority and without delay.
Amendment 717 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) it has particular expertise and competence for the purposes of detecting, identifying and notifying manifestly illegal content in a designated area of expertise;
Amendment 722 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) it represents collective, non- commercial interests and is independent from any online platform;
Amendment 724 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) it carries out its activities for the purposes of submitting notices in a timely, diligent and objective manner and in full respect of fundamental rights such as the freedom of expression and information.
Amendment 736 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 5
Article 19 – paragraph 5
5. Where an online platform has information indicating that a trusted flagger submitted a significant number of insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated noticesor incorrect notices, or notices violating recipients’ fundamental rights, through the mechanisms referred to in Article 14, including information gathered in connection to the processing of complaints through the internal complaint- handling systems referred to in Article 17(3), it shall communicate that information to the Digital Services Coordinator that awarded the status of trusted flagger to the entity concerned, providing the necessary explanations and supporting documents.
Amendment 813 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the number of disputes submitted to thecertified out-of-court dispute settlement bodies referred to in Article 18, the outcomes of the dispute settlement and the average time needed for completing the dispute settlement procedures;
Amendment 827 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the natural or legal person on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed and the natural or legal person who finances the advertisement;
Amendment 832 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)
2. Online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall include in the reports referred to in Article 13 the following information: (a) the number of advertisements removed, disabled, or labelled by the online platform, accompanied by a justification explaining the grounds for the decision; (b) aggregated data on the provider of the online advertisements that were removed, disabled or labelled by the online platform, including information on the advertisement published, the amount paid for the advertisement and information on the target audience, if applicable.
Amendment 846 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. This Section shall apply to online platforms which provide their services to a number of averagunique monthly active recipients of the service in the Union equal to or higher than 45 million on average, calculated in accordance with the methodology set out in the delegated acts referred to in paragraph 3.
Amendment 855 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Very large online platforms shall identify, analyse and assess, from the date of application referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 25(4), at least once a year thereafter, any significant systemic risks stemming from the functioning and use made of their services and activities, such as business model and design decisions, in the Union. This risk assessment shall be specific to their services and shall include the following systemic risks:
Amendment 866 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any negative effects for the exercise of the fundamental rights to, including the respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, freedom and pluralism of the media, the prohibition of discrimination and the rights of the child, as enshrined in Articles 7, 11, 21 and 24 of the Charter respectively;
Amendment 902 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 27 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) identification and assessment of the most prominent and recurrentall systemic risks reported by very large online platforms or identified through other information sources, in particular those provided in compliance with Article 31 and 33;
Amendment 930 #
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 their terms and conditions, in a clear, accessible and easily comprehensible manner, the main parameters used in their recommender systems, as well as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence those main parameters 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. Any option based on profiling within the meaning of Article 4 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 shall never be the default setting of a recommender system.
Amendment 934 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 942 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Very large online platforms that use recommender systems shall allow the recipient of the service to have information presented to them in a chronological order only and, where technically possible, to use third-party recommender systems. Third-party recommender systems shall have access to the same information available to the recommender systems used by the platform, notwithstanding the platform’s obligations under Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Very large online platforms may only temporarily limit access to third- party recommender systems in case of provable abuse by the third-party provider or when justified by an immediate requirement to address a technical issue such as a serious security vulnerability.
Amendment 948 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 1
1. Very large online platforms that display advertising on their online interfaces shall compile and make publicly available through application programming interfaces an easily accessible and searchable repository containing the information referred to in paragraph 2, until onfive years after the advertisement was displayed for the last time on their online interfaces. They shall ensure that the repository does not contain any personal data of the recipients of the service to whom the advertisement was or could have been displayed.
Amendment 951 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 30 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the natural or legal person on whose behalf the advertisement is displayed and the natural or legal person who finances the advertisement;
Amendment 956 #
2020/0361(COD)
(ea) any decisions by the online platform regarding labelling, removal or disabling of online advertisements, including a justification explaining the grounds for the decision.
Amendment 972 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. Very large online platforms shall provide access to data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 through online databases or application programming interfaces, as appropriate in an easily accessible and user-friendly format. This shall include personal data only where it is lawfully accessible by the public and without prejudice to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
Amendment 975 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. In order to be vetted, researchers shall be affiliated with academic institutions, be independent from commercial interests or civil society organisations representing the public interest, be independent from commercial interests, disclose the sources of funding financing their research, have proven records of expertise in the fields related to the risks investigated or related research methodologies, and shall commit and be in a capacity to preserve the specific data security and confidentiality requirements corresponding to each request.
Amendment 977 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall, after consulting the Board, and no later than one year after entry into force of this Regulation, adopt delegated acts laying down the technical conditions under which very large online platforms are to share data pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 and the purposes for which the data may be used. Those delegated acts shall lay down the specific conditions under which such sharing of data with vetted researchers can take place in compliance with Regulation (EU) 2016/679, taking into account the rights and interests of the very large online platforms and the recipients of the service concerned, including the protection of confidential information, in particular trade secrets, and maintaining the security of their service.
Amendment 1006 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 a (new)
Article 33 a (new)
Amendment 1011 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Absence of agreement on voluntary industry standards shall not prevent the applicability or implementation of any measures outlined in this regulation.
Amendment 1051 #
2020/0361(COD)
3. Paragraph 2 is without prejudice to the tasks of Digital Services Coordinators within the system of supervision and enforcement provided for in this Regulation and the cooperation with other competent authorities in accordance with Article 38(2). Paragraph 2 shall not prevent supervision of the authorities concerned in accordance with national constitutional law or the allocation of additional powers under other applicable law.
Amendment 1069 #
2020/0361(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 43 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Reporting persons within the meaning of Article 4 of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 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 reporting person resides. Such complaints shall be treated with priority by the Digital Services Coordinator and shall, where appropriate, be transmitted to the Digital Service Coordinator of the establishment of the provider of the intermediary service concerned.
Amendment 48 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Given the increasingly global nature of serious crime and terrorism brought about by growing mobility, the information that third countries and international organisations, such as the International Criminal Police Organization and the International Criminal Court, obtain about criminals and terrorists is increasingly relevant for the Union‘s security. Such information shcould contribute to the comprehensive efforts to ensure internal security in the European Union. Some of this information is only shared with Europol. While Europol holds valuable information received from external partners on serious criminals and terrorists, it cannot issue alerts in SIS. Member States are also not always able to issue alerts in SIS on the basis of such information.
Amendment 58 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order to assess whether a concrete case is adequate, relevant and important enough to warrant the entry of an alert in SIS, and in order to confirm the reliability of the source of information and the accuracy of the information on the person concerned, that the information was not obtained in breach of fundamental rights of the person, that it was not communicated to Europol for unlawful purposes or motivated by political reasons, Europol should carry out a detailed individual assessment of each case, including further consultations with the third country or international organisation that shared the data on the person concerned, as well as further analysis of the case, in particular by cross checking it against information it already holds in its databases, to confirm the accuracy of the information and complement it with other data on the basis of its own databases. The detailed individual assessment should include the analysis of whether there are sufficient grounds for considering that the person has committed or taken part in, or will commit a criminal offence in respect of which Europol is competent.
Amendment 63 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Europol should only be able to enter an alert in SIS if the person concerned is not already subject to a SIS alert issued by a Member State. A further precondition for the creation of such an alert should be that Member States do not object to the alert being issued in SIS. Therefore, it is necessary to establish rules on the obligations ofor Europol prior to entering data in SIS, in particular the obligation to consult the Member States in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/794. It should also be possible for Member States to request the deletion of an alert by Europol, in particular ifwhere they have reasonable grounds to believe that the information in the alert is inaccurate, or they obtain new information about the person who is the subject of the alert, if their national security requires so or when it is likely that the alert would represent a risk for official or legal inquiries, investigations or procedures.
Amendment 69 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) It is necessary to establish rules concerning the deletion of alerts entered in SIS by Europol. An alert should be kept only for the time required to achieve the purpose for which it was entered. It is therefore appropriate to set out detailed criteria to determine when the alert should be deleted. An alert entered by Europol in SIS should be deleted in particular ifafter the expiry of the alert, where a Member State objects, to an alert, where another alert is entered in SIS by a Member State, or if Europol becomes aware, based on new information, that the information received from the third country or international organisation was incorrect orwas incorrect, the person is no longer suspected to be involved in a criminal activity, or the information was communicated to Europol for unlawful purposes, for example if sharing the information on the person was motivated by political reasons.
Amendment 92 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2018/1862
Article 37a – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 37a – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Europol may only enter an alert in SIS on persons who are third-country nationals on the basis of information received from a third country or an international organisation in accordance with Article 17(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2016/794, where it has assessed that the information relates to one of the following:
Amendment 133 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2018/1862
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 48 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Europol shallmay also exchange and further request supplementary information in accordance with the provisions of the SIRENE Manual. To that end, Europol shall ensure availability to supplementary information related to its own alerts 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Amendment 143 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2018/1862
Article 53 – paragraph 8
Article 53 – paragraph 8
8. Member States and Europol shall keep statistics on the number of alerts on persons the retention periods of which have been extended in accordance with paragraph 6 of this Article and transmit them, upon request, to the supervisory authorities referred to in Article 69, and, in case of Europol, to the EDPS.
Amendment 163 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EU) 2018/1862
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
(4) Member States and Europol shall report annually to the European Data Protection Board and Europol to the EDPS on:
Amendment 178 #
2020/0350(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Regulation (EU) 2018/1862
Article 79 – paragraph 7
Article 79 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall adopt a decision setting the date on which Europol shallmay start entering, updating and deleting dataalerts in SIS, pursuant to this Regulation, as amended by Regulation [XXX], after verification that the following conditions have been met:
Amendment 208 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
Amendment 241 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p
(p) ‘administrative personal data’ means all personal data processed by Europol apart from operational personal data;;
Amendment 243 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c – introductory part
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
(c) the following point (q) isand (qa) are added:
Amendment 245 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
(q a) ‘crisis situation’ means an ongoing or recent real-world event relating to terrorism or violent extremism, where online material is created depicting harm to life orto physical integrity, or calls for imminent harm to life or physical integrity, and aims at, or has the effect of seriously intimidating a population, and where there is an anticipated potential of exponential multiplication and virality across multiple online services.”
Amendment 248 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point ii
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 4 paragraph 1 – point j
Article 4 paragraph 1 – point j
(j) cooperate with the Union bodies established on the basis of Title V of the TFEU, ands well as with OLAF and ENISA, in particular through exchanges of information and by providing them with analytical support in the areas that falling, within their competence;;
Amendment 250 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point ii
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j a – new
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j a – new
(j a) cooperate with Financial Intelligence Units regulated by Directive 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the basis of Article 114 TFEU, in particular through exchanges of information and by providing them with analytical support to combat money laundering and terrorism financing
Amendment 253 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iii
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) support Member States’ actions in preventing and combating forms of crime listed in Annex I which are facilitated, promoted or committed using the internet, including, in cooperation with Member States, the coordination of law enforcement authorities’ response to cyberattacks, the taking down of terrorist content online, and the making of referrals of internet content, by which such to the online service providers concerned, of content whereby these forms of crime are facilitated, promoted or committed, to the online service providers concerned for their voluntary consideration of the compatibility of the referred internet content with their own terms and conditions;;
Amendment 262 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point r
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point r
(r) enter alerts containing personal data into the Schengen Information System, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1862 of the European Parliament and of the Council*, following consultation with the Member States in accordance with Article 7 of this Regulation, and under authorisation by the Europol Executive Director, on the suspected involvement of a third country national in an offence in respect of which Europol is competent and of which it is aware on the basis of information received from third countries or international organisations within the meaning of Article 17(1)(b);
Amendment 268 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point t
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point t
(t) proactively monitor and contribute to research and innovation activities relevant to achieveing the objectives set out in Article 3, by supporting related activities of Member States, and implementing its research and innovation activities regarding matters covered by this Regulation, including the development, training, testing and validation of algorithms for the development of toolsspecific tools for the use of law enforcement.
Amendment 272 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iv
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a – point iv
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – ponit u
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – ponit u
(u) support Member States’ actions in preventing the dissemination of online content related to terrorism or violent extremism in crisis situations, which stems from an ongoing or recent real-world event, depicts harm to life or physical integrity or calls for imminent harm to life or physical integrity, and aims at or has the effect of seriously intimidating a population, and where there is an anticipated potential for exponential multiplication and virality across multiple online service providersas defined in Article 26a.
Amendment 287 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point d
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 4 – paragraph 4b
Article 4 – paragraph 4b
4b. Europol shall support the Commission and the Member States in the screening of specific cases of foreign direct investments into the Union under Regulation (EU) 2019/452 of the European Parliament and of the Council* that concern undertakings providing technologies used or being developed by Europol or by Member States for the prevention and investigation of crimes covered by Article 3 on the expected implications for security.
Amendment 292 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1
Amendment 299 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 7 – paragraph 8
Article 7 – paragraph 8
8. Member States shall ensure that their competent authorities, particularly their financial intelligence units established pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council*, are allowed to cooperate with Europol in accordance with Article 11 and Article 12 of Directive (EU) 2019/1153 of the European Parliament and the Council**, in particular via their national unit regarding, via their national unit or, if allowed by that Member State, by direct contact with Europol regarding bank account information, financial information and analyses, within the limits of their mandate and competence.”
Amendment 315 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point ii
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) research and innovation regarding matters covered by this Regulation for the development, training, testing and validation of algorithms for the development of toolsspecific tools for the use of law enforcement;
Amendment 318 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point ii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point ii
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point f
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point f
(f) supporting Member States in informing the public about suspects or convicted individuals who are wanted, based on a national judicial decision relating to a criminal offence in respect of which Europol is competent, and facilitateing the provision of information, to the Member States and Europol, by the public on these individuals.
Amendment 322 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18 – paragraph 3a
Article 18 – paragraph 3a
3a. Processing of personal data for the purpose of research and innovation as referred to in point (e) of paragraph 2 shall be performed by means of Europol’s research and innovation projects with clearly defined objectives, duration and scope of the personal data processing involved, in respect of whichpurpose and objectives, and shall be subject to the additional specific safeguards, as set out in Article 33a shall apply, in respect of the duration and scope of the necessary personal data processing.
Amendment 331 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18 – paragraph 5a
Article 18 – paragraph 5a
5a. Prior to the processing of data under paragraph 2 of this Article, Europol may temporarily process personal data received pursuant to Article 17(1) and (2) for the sole purpose of determining whether such data comply with the requirements of paragraph 5 of this Article, including by checking the data against all data that Europol already processes in accordance with paragraph 5.
Amendment 333 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point d
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18 – paragraph 6
Article 18 – paragraph 6
Europol may only process personal data pursuant to this paragraph for a maximum period of one year, or in duly justified cases for a longer period with the prior authorisation of the EDPS, where necessary and proportionate for the purpose of this Article. Where such temporary processing is no longer necessary and proportionate, where the results of the processing indicates that personal data do not comply with the requirements of paragraph 5 of this Article, Europol shall delete that data or in any case at the end of the processing period, Europol shall permanently delete that personal data and the results of the processing,and inform the provider of the data accordingly.”
Amendment 339 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18a – Title
Article 18a – Title
Amendment 345 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 18a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) Europol assesses that it is not possible to carry out the operational analysis of the investigative case file without processing personal data that does not comply with the requirements of Article 18(5). This assessment shall be recorded and sent to the EDPS for their information.
Amendment 352 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 18a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The Management Board, acting on a proposal from the Executive Director and after consulting the EDPS, shall further specify the conditions relating to the processing of such data. personal data, in particular regarding the scale and complexity of the processing and the type and importance of the specific investigation
Amendment 356 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 18a – paragraph 3
Article 18a – paragraph 3
The Management Board, acting on a proposal from the Executive Director and after consulting the EDPS, shall further specify the conditions relating to the processing of such datapersonal data, in particular as to the scale of the processing. Such personal data shall be functionally separated from other data and may only be accessed where necessary for the purpose of ensuring the veracity, reliability and traceability of the criminal intelligence process. Where Europol reaches the conclusion that there are preliminary indications that such data is disproportionate or collected in violation of fundamental rights, Europol shall not process it, but permanently delete it. When the processing period for the personal data ends, the personal data shall be permanently deleted.
Amendment 370 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. When national procedural law allows for Europol staff to provide evidence whichthat has caome to their knowledge in the performance of their duties or the exercise of their activities, only Europol staff authorised by the Executive Director to do so shall be able to give such evidence in judicicriminal proceedings in the Member States.;
Amendment 372 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 20a – paragraph 2
Article 20a – paragraph 2
2. Proceeding a request by the EPPO, Europol shall actively support the investigations and prosecutions of the EPPO and cooperate with it, in particular through exchanges of information and by providing analytical support.
Amendment 373 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 21 – paragraph 8
Article 21 – paragraph 8
8. If, during information-processing activities in respect of an individual specific investigation or specific project, Europol identifies information relevant to possible illegal activity affecting the financial interest of the Union, Europol shall, on its own initiative, without undue delay, provide OLAF with that information.
Amendment 376 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. SIn line with Article 71(2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1735 and subject to any further restrictions pursuant to this Regulation, in particular pursuant to Article 19(2) and (3) and without prejudice to Article 67, Europol shall only transmit operational personal data to another Union institution, body, office or agency if the personal data are necessary for the legitimate performance of tasks of the other Union institution, body, office or agency.
Amendment 377 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point -a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point -a a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
-a a Subparagraph 1 of paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "Chapter V of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 shall apply to transfers of administrative personal data to third countries and international organisations. In cases of transfers of personal operational data to third countries and international organisations, this Regulation, including any possible restrictions pursuant to Article 19(2) or (3) and taking into account Article 67, and Article 94 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 shall apply."
Amendment 378 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point -a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point -a a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 25 – paragraph 3
Article 25 – paragraph 3
-a a Paragraph 3 is deleted.
Amendment 383 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 25 – paragraph 5
Article 25 – paragraph 5
By way of derogation from paragraph 1, the Executive Director may authorise the transfer or specific categories of transfers of personal data to third countries or international organisations on a case-by- case basis if the transfer is, or the related transfers are:;
Amendment 390 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 26 – paragraph 2
Article 26 – paragraph 2
2. Europol may receive personal data directly from private parties and process those personal data in accordance with Article 18 in order to identify allthe national units concerned, as referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1. Europol shall forward the personal data and any relevant results from the processing of that data necessary for the purpose ofnecessary processing for establishing jurisdiction immediately to the national units concerned. Europol may forward the personal data and relevant results from the processing of that data necessary for the purpose ofnecessary processing for establishing jurisdiction, in accordance with Article 25 to contact points and authorities concerned, as referred to in points (b) and (c) of paragraph 1. Once Europol has identified and forwarded the relevant personal data to all the respective national units concerned, or it is not possible to identify further national units concerned, it shall erase the data, unless a national unit, contact point or authority concerned resubmits the personal data to Europol in accordance with Article 19(1) within four months after the transfer takes place.
Amendment 395 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. If Europol receives personal data from a private party in a third country, Europol may forward those data only to a Member State, or to a third country concerned with which an agreement on the basis of Article 23 of Decision 2009/371/JHA or on the basis of Article 218 TFEU has been concluded or which is the subject of an adequacy decision as referred to in point (a) of Article 25(1) of this Regulation. Where the conditions set out under paragraphs 5 and 6 of Article 25 are fulfilled, Europol may transfer the result of its analysis and verification of such data withto the third country concerned.
Amendment 400 #
2020/0349(COD)
(c) the transmission or transfer of personal data whichthat are publicly available is strictly necessary for the performance of the task set out in point (m) of Article 4(1) and the following conditions are met:
Amendment 401 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 26 – paragraph 5 – point c – point i
Article 26 – paragraph 5 – point c – point i
(i) the transmission or transfer concerns an individual and a specific case;
Amendment 407 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 26 – paragraph 6 –subparagraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 6 –subparagraph 1
6. With regard to points (a), (b) and (d) of paragraph 5 of this Article, if the private party concerned is not established within the Union or in a country with which Europol has a cooperation agreement allowing for the exchange of personal data, but with which the Union has concluded an international agreement pursuant to Article 218 TFEU or which is the subject ofthere is an adequacy decision as referred to in point (a) of Article 25(1) of this Regulation, the transfer shall only be authorised by the Executive Director if the transfer is:
Amendment 412 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 point (d)
Article 26 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 point (d)
(d) necessary in individual cases for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of a specific criminal offences for which Europol is competent; or
Amendment 416 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 26 – paragraph 6a – subparagraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 6a – subparagraph 1
6a. Europol may send a reasoned request to Member States, via their national units, to obtain strictly necessary personal data from private parties, whichthat are established or have a legal representative in their territory, under their applicable laws, for the purpose of sharing it with Europol, on the condition that the requested personal data is strictly limited to what is necessary for Europol with a view tosole purpose of identifying the national units concerned. In such cases, where a Member State decides to make a request on behalf of Europol, they shall inform the private parties, that the provision of the requested information in these cases is voluntary. The personal data requested shall be as targetted as possible and refer to the least sensitive personal data available.
Amendment 426 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 26 – paragraph 6b
Article 26 – paragraph 6b
6b. Europol’s infrastructure may be used for exchanges between the competent authorities of Member States and private parties in accordance with the respective Member States’ national laws. In cases where Member States use this infrastructure for exchanges of personal data on crimes falling outside the scope of the objectives of Europol, Europol shall not have access to that data and shall be considered as a “processor” in the meaning of Article 29 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725.
Amendment 435 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a – introductory part
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a – introductory part
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
(a) in paragraph 2, the first sentence is replaced by the following and paragraph 2a is added:
Amendment 436 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
2. .Processing of personal data, by automated or other means, revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union membership, and the processing of genetic data and, biometric data for the purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, or data concerning a person’s health orhealth or concerning natural persons’ sex life or sexual orientation shall be allowed only where strictly necessary and proportionate for operational purposes, within the mandate of Europol, and subject to appropriate safeguards for the rights and freedoms of the data subject, and only for the purposes of preventing or combating crime that falls within Europol’s objectives, and only if those data supplement other personal data processed by Europol.; Discrimination against natural persons on the basis of such personal data shall be prohibited
Amendment 439 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 30 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. The data protection officer shall be informed without undue delay of recourse to this Article.
Amendment 440 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 16 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Article 30 – paragraph 2
Amendment 448 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 33a – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 33a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) any project shall be subject to prior authorisation by the Executive Director, based on a description of the envisaged processing activity, setting out the necessity toand process personal data, such as for exploring and testing innovative solutions and ensuring accuracy of the project resultsportionality to process the personal data, a description of the personal data to be processed, a description of the retention period and conditions for access to the personal data, a data protection impact assessment of the risks to all rights and freedoms of data subjects, including of any bias in the outcome, and the measures envisaged to address those risks;
Amendment 450 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 33a – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 33a – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) when processing personal data for research and innovation, the processing shall only take place where: (i) fully required in order to achieve the objectives of the project; (ii) the use of anonymised personal data is not possible; (iii) the processing of special categories of personal data is excluded, or where explicitly, strictly necessary, accompanied by appropriate additional safeguards;and (iv) principles of data minimisation, privacy by design and default are guaranteed;
Amendment 471 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. IWithout prejudice to Article 92 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725, in the event of a personal data breach, Europol shall without undue delay notify the competent authorities of the Member States concerned, of that breach, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 7(5), as well as the provider of the data concerned unless the personal data breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons.;
Amendment 476 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 36 – paragraph 3
Article 36 – paragraph 3
3. Any data subject wishing to exercise the right of access referred to in Article 80 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 to personal data that relate to the data subjectm may make a request to that effect, without incurring excessive costs, to the authority appointed for that purpose in the Member State of his or hetheir choice, or to Europol. Where the request is made to the Member State authority, that authority shall refer the request to Europol without delay, and in any case within one month of receipt.;
Amendment 484 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41 –paragraph 1
Article 41 –paragraph 1
1. The Management Board shall appoint a Data Protection Officer, who shall be a member of the staff specifically appointed for this purpose. In the performance of his or her duties, he or she shall act independently and may not receive any instructions.
Amendment 485 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41 – paragraph 2
Article 41 – paragraph 2
2. The Data Protection Officer shall be selected on the basis of his or her personal andtheir professional qualities and, in particular, the expert knowledge of data protection law and practices and the ability to fulfil his or hetheir tasks under this Regulation.
Amendment 486 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41 – paragraph 3
Article 41 – paragraph 3
3. The selection of the Data Protection Officer shall not be liable to result in a conflict of interests between his or hetheir duty as Data Protection Officer and any other official duties the or shey may have had, in particular in relation to the application of this Regulation.
Amendment 487 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41 – paragraph 4
Article 41 – paragraph 4
Amendment 490 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41 – paragraph 5
Article 41 – paragraph 5
Amendment 491 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41a – paragraph 2
Article 41a – paragraph 2
2. Europol shall support the Data Protection Officer in performing the tasks referred to in Article 41c by providing the resources and staff necessary to carry out those tasks and by providing access to personal data and processing operations, and to maintain his or hetheir expert knowledge. The related staff may be supplemented by an assistant DPO in the area of operational and administrative processing of personal data.
Amendment 493 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41a – paragraph 3
Article 41a – paragraph 3
3. Europol shall ensure that the Data Protection Officer doesacts independently and shall not receive any instructions regarding the exercise of those tasks. The Data Protection Officer shall report directly to the Management Board. The Data Protection Officer shall not be dismissed or penalised by the Management Board for performing his or hetheir tasks.
Amendment 494 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 Regulation (EU) 2016/794
5. The Management Board shall adopt further implementing rules concerning the Data Protection Officer. Those implementing rules shall in particular concern the selection procedure for the position of the Data Protection Officer, his or hetheir dismissal, tasks, duties and powers, and safeguards for the independence of the Data Protection Officer.
Amendment 495 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41a – paragraph 6
Article 41a – paragraph 6
6. The Data Protection Officer and his or hetheir staff shall be bound by the obligation of confidentiality in accordance with Article 67(1).
Amendment 496 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41a – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 41a – paragraph 6 a (new)
Amendment 497 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41a – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 41a – paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. After their designation, the Data Protection Officer shall be registered with the European Data Protection Supervisor by the Management Board.
Amendment 499 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41b – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 41b – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) cooperating with the EDPSand responding to requests of the EDPS, within the sphere of their competence, to cooperate and consult with the European Data Protection Supervisor at the latter’s request or on their own initiative;;
Amendment 500 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41a
Article 41a
(k a) (l) ensuring that the rights and freedoms of data subjects are not adversely affected by processing operations;
Amendment 501 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 41b
Article 41b
Amendment 529 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point i
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point i
(i) annual information about the number of pilot projects in which Europol processed personal data to train, test and validate algorithms for the development of tools, including AI-based tools, for law enforcement in accordance with Article 33a, including information on the purposes of these projects, the categories of personal data being processed, the additional safeguards used, the data minimisation processes used, and the law enforcement needs they seek to address.;
Amendment 533 #
2020/0349(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37 – point a Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37 – point a Regulation (EU) 2016/794
(i a) annual information on the number and types of cases where sensitive categories of personal data were processed, pursuant to Article 30(2);
Amendment 48 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Ensuring an effective access of citizens and businesses to justice and facilitating judicial cooperation between the Member Statesin civil and criminal matters between the Member States, while ensuring the right to a fair trial and upholding the rights of the defence, are among the main objectives of the EU’s Area of Freedom, Security and Justice enshrined in Title V of the Treaty.
Amendment 54 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) It is thus important that appropriate channels are developed to ensure that justice systems can efficiently cooperate in a digital way. Therefore, it is essential to establish, at Union level, an information technology instrument that allows swift, direct, interoperable, reliable and secure cross-border electronic exchange of case related data, while always respecting the right to protection of personal data. Such a system, enabling citizens and businesses to exchange documents and evidence in digital form with judicial or other competent authorities, when provided forby national or Union law, should contribute to improving access to justice, increasing mutual trust between Member States' judicial authorities, and upholding the rights of the defence in criminal proceedings.
Amendment 59 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The e-CODEX system is a tool specifically designed to facilitate the cross- border electronic exchange of messages in the justice area. In the context of increased digitalisation of proceedings in civil and criminal matters, the aim of the e-CODEX system is to improve the efficiency of cross-border communication between the competent authorities and facilitate access to justice of citizens and businesses. IUntil now, it has been managed up to date by a consortium of Member States and organisations with funding from Union programmes.
Amendment 61 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) The e-CODEX system is conceived as the preferred instrument in order to facilitate the interoperable, secure and decentralised communication network between national IT systems in the area of cross-border judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters.
Amendment 64 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Given the importance of the e- CODEX system for cross-border exchanges in the justice area in the Union, there should be a sustainable Union legal framework establishing the e-CODEX system and providing rules regarding its functioning and development. Such legal framework should ensure the protection of fundamental rights as provided for in the Charter, in particular those outlined in Title VI and Article 47 on the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. It shall in no way undermine the protection of procedural rights that are essential to the protection of those rights, including those stemming from Directives (EU) 2016/343, 2013/48/EU, 2012/13/EU and 2010/64/EU, and to facilitate judicial cooperation between the Member States. It should also clearly define and frame the components of the e-CODEX system in order to guarantee its technical sustainability and security. The system should define the IT components of an access point, which should consist of a gateway for the purpose of secure communication with other identified gateways and a connector for the purpose of supporting the message exchanges. It should also include digital procedural standards consisting of the business process models and templates defining the electronic format of the documents usata exchanged in the context of those procedures to support the use of e-CODEX access points for legal procedures provided for by legal acts adopted in the area of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters and to enable the exchange of information between the access points.
Amendment 66 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Given the importance of the e- CODEX system for cross-border exchanges in the justice area in the Union, there should be a sustainable Union legal framework establishing the e-CODEX system and providing rules regarding its functioning and development. Such legal framework should clearly define and frame the components of the e-CODEX system in order to guarantee its technical sustainability. It should also ensure equality of arms in the context of cross- border criminal proceedings, by ensuring equal access to the e-CODEX system for prosecutors and those representing the prosecution, on the one hand, and representatives of suspects and accused persons, on the other. The system should define the IT components of an access point, which should consist of a gateway for the purpose of secure communication with other identified gateways and a connector for the purpose of supporting the message exchanges. It should also include digital procedural standards consisting of the business process models and templates defining the electronic format of the documents used in the context of those procedures to support the use of e-CODEX access points for legal procedures provided for by legal acts adopted in the area of judicial cooperation and to enable the exchange of information between the access points.
Amendment 70 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Since it is necessary to ensure the long term sustainability of the e-CODEX system and its governance while taking into account the independence of the national judiciaries, an appropriate entitensuring the independence of the national judiciaries, an appropriate entity for the operational management of the system should be designated. In order to ensure the independence of the national judiciaries, including in the governance of the e-CODEX system, there should be a clear separation of services and personnel, data and administration inside the European Union Agency for the oOperational mManagement of the system should be designatedLarge-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA) established by Regulation (EU) 2018/1726 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a. _________________ 1aRegulation (EU) 2018/1726 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 on the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA), and amending Regulation (EC) No 1987/2006 and Council Decision 2007/533/JHA and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1077/2011 (OJ L 295, 21.11.2018, p. 99).
Amendment 76 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) According to Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1726 the role of the Management Board of eu-LISA is, inter alia, to ensure that all decisions and actions of the Agency affecting large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice respect the principle of independence of the judiciary. The governance structure of the Agency and financing scheme should further guarantee the respect of that principle. ÌIt is also important to involve the legal professions and other relevant stakeholders in the governance of the e-CODEX system through the Programme Management Board. The detailed arrangements and conditions as regards the involvement of the legal professions and other relevant stakeholders should allow for their effective participation and consultation, namely by duly considering their feedback.
Amendment 92 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The Member States should maintain a list of authorised e-CODEX access points operated within their territory, and communicate them to eu- LISA in order to enable the interaction between them in the context of the relevant procedures. The Commission should maintain and publish a similar list of authorised e- CODEX access points operated by the Union institutions, bodies and agencies for the same reason. The entities operating the access points at national level may be public authorities, organisations representing legal practitioners or private companies. Bearing in mind the decentralised nature of the e-CODEX system, while eu-LISA should ensure the operational management of the e-CODEX system, the responsibility for setting up and operating the authorised e-CODEX access points should lie exclusively with the entities operating the relevant access points. The entities operating the authorised e-CODEX access point should bear the responsibility for any damage resulting from the operation of the authorised e-CODEX access point.
Amendment 97 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The Member States should maintain a list of authorised e-CODEX access points operated within their territory, and communicate them to eu- LISA in order to enable the interaction between them in the context of the relevant procedures. The Commission should maintain a similar list of authorised e- CODEX access points operated by the Union institutions, bodies and agencies for the same reason. The entities operating the access points at national level may be public authorities, or organisations representing legal practitioners or private companies. Bearing in mind the decentralised nature of the e- CODEX system, while eu-LISA should ensure the operational management of the e-CODEX system, the responsibility for setting up and operating the authorised e- CODEX access points should lie exclusively with the entities operating the relevant access points. The entities operating the authorised e-CODEX access point should bear the responsibility for any damage resulting from the operation of the authorised e-CODEX access point.
Amendment 101 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) Member States should should supervise their authorised e-CODEX access points, for which they are responsible, in particular when they are operated by entities that are not public authorities. Member States should ensure that adequate data security measures are in place.
Amendment 115 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21 a) To enable the European Parliament and the Council, as co- legislators, to assess the success of the transfer of the e-CODEX system and how well the e-CODEX system functions in general, the Commission should produce an overall evaluation of the e-CODEX system. This evaluation should be prepared for the first time, three years after eu-LISA takes over responsibility for the e-CODEX system and every three years thereafter.
Amendment 116 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) This Regulation should not provide any specific legal basis for processing personal data. Any processing of personal data performed in the framework of this Regulation should be in accordance with the applicable data protection rules. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and the Council35 and, Directives (EU) 2016/68036 and 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and the Council36 , aapply to the processing of personal data carried out by e-CODEX access points, operated by authorised e- CODEX access points which are established within the territory of the Member States according to this Regulation. _________________ 35Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 36 Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 89). 36aDirective 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications) (OJ L 201, 31.7.2002, p. 37).
Amendment 123 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
This Regulation shall apply to the electronic transmission of information in the context of cross-border civil and criminal proceedings by means of the e- CODEX system in accordance with the legal acts adopted in the area of judicial cooperation listed in Annex I. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 17a in order to amend Annex I by adding to the list included therein further legal acts providing for procedures that fall within the area of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters.
Amendment 131 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) 'e-CODEX correspondent' means an entity designated by a Member State or the Commission as competent to request and receive technical support from eu- LISA in relation to the e-CODEX system.
Amendment 136 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a Non-discrimination and respect for fundamental rights The fundamental rights and freedoms of all persons implicated in the electronic exchange of information through the e- CODEX system, in particular the right to equal access to justice, the right to a fair trial, the principle of non-discrimination and the right to protection of personal data and privacy, shall be fully observed and respected in accordance with Union law.
Amendment 137 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a Legal effects of electronic documents Documents that are transmitted through the e-CODEX system shall not be denied legal effect or considered inadmissible as evidence in the proceeding solely on the grounds that they are in electronic form.
Amendment 145 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission mayshall adopt implementing acts establishing detailed technical specifications on the digital procedural standards defined in Article 4(3).
Amendment 160 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) informing the general public through the Internet about e-CODEX, by means of a set of large-scale communication channels, such asincluding but not limited to, websites or social media platforms;
Amendment 165 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States shall inform the general public, in particular individuals and organisations involved in or affected by a judicial process about e-CODEX, including through websites and social media platforms.
Amendment 173 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. During a period of not more than six months after the delivery of the handover document referred to in paragraph 1 a handover/takeover process shall take place between the entity managing the e-CODEX system and eu- LISA. During that period, the entity managing the e-CODEX system shall retain full responsibility for the e- CODEX system and shall ensure that only corrective maintenance activities are performed in the system, excluding any other types of changes to the system. It shall, in particular, not deliver any new release of the e-CODEX system.
Amendment 174 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall monitor the handover/takeover process in order to ensure that the detailed arrangements of the process are correctly implemented by the entity managing the e-CODEX system and eu-LISA, on the basis of the criteria referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission shall update the European Parliament and the Council by 31 July 2023 on the handover/takeover process.
Amendment 184 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
4. The e-CODEX Advisory Group shall involve in its work the professional organisations representing those involved in the administration of justice at Member State level, and other stakeholders, which participated in the management of the e- CODEX system at the time of its handover.
Amendment 191 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 5 – point d
(d) admission of experts to the meetings, including professional organisations representing those involved in the administration of justice at Member State level, and other stakeholders, participating in the management of the e- CODEX system at the moment of its handover;
Amendment 193 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a When carrying out their responsibilities under this Regulation, all entities shall respect the principle of the separation of powers and ensure that their decisions and actions respect the principle of the autonomy and independence of the judiciary.
Amendment 199 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. For the first time, three years after eu-LISA takes over responsibility for the e- CODEX system, and every fourthree years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of the e-CODEX system. That overall evaluation shall include an assessment of the application of this Regulation and an examination of results achieved against objectives, and may propose possible future actions. It shall also include an assessment of the effect of the use of e-CODEX on equality of arms in the context of cross-border criminal proceedings. In that regard, it shall assess the access enjoyed and use of e-CODEX by representatives of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings. At the time of the first evaluation, the Commission shall also reexamine the role of the Programme Management Board and its continuation. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 200 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. For the first time, three years after eu-LISA takes over responsibility for the e- CODEX system, and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall produce an overall evaluation of the e-CODEX system. That overall evaluation shall include an assessment of the application of this Regulation and an examination of results achieved against objectives, and may propose possible future actions. At the time of the first evaluation, the Commission shall also reexamine the role of the Programme Management Board and its continuation on objective grounds and shall, as a first step, propose any necessary improvements. The Commission shall transmit the evaluation report to the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 203 #
2020/0345(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a (new)
Article 17 a Exercise of the delegation 1. The power to adopted delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the conditions laid down in this Article. 2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 2 shall be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from ... [the date of entry into force of this Regulation]. 3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 2 may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall put an end to the delegation of power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force. 4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making. 5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the European Parliament and the Council. 6. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 2 shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of two months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
Amendment 117 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2 a) The outbreak of COVID 19 pandemic has clearly exacerbated existing inequalities in respect of digital access and literacy, in particular in terms of gender, age and social backgrounds. Accordingly, data literacy should be part of the strategic actions to reduce social inequalities and to promote a socially balanced digital environment.
Amendment 185 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Public sector bodies should be able to charge fees for the re-use of data but should also be able to decide to make the data available at lower or no cost, for example for certain categories of re-uses such as non-commercial re-use, or re-use by small and medium-sized enterprises, including social economy enterprises, so as to incentivise such re-use in order to stimulate research and innovation and support companies that are an important source of innovation and typically find it more difficult to collect relevant data themselves, in line with State aid rules. Such fees should be reasonable, transparent, published online and non- discriminatory.
Amendment 199 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Data cooperatives seek to strengthen the position of individuals in making informed choices before consenting to data use, influencing the terms and conditions of data user organisations attached to data use or potentially solving disputes between members of a group on how data can be used when such data pertain to several data subjects within that group. In this context it is important to acknowledge that the rights under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 can only be exercised by each individual and cannot be conferred or delegated to a data cooperative. Data cooperatives could also provide a useful means for one-person companies, micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, including social economy enterprises, that in terms of knowledge of data sharing, are often comparable to individuals. Accordingly, the establishment of such cooperatives should be encouraged as an operating mechanism of data intermediation, exchange and sharing activities, which could ensure a truly shared participatory governance whilst increasing trust among the actors involved.
Amendment 222 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) Providers of data sharing services should also take measures to ensure compliance with competition law. Data sharing may generate various types of efficiencies but may also lead to restrictions of competition, in particular where it includes the sharing of competitively sensitive information. This applies in particular in situations where data sharing enables businesses to become aware of market strategies of their actual or potential competitors. Competitively sensitive information typically includes information on future prices, production costs, quantities, turnovers, sales or capacities. Given that some data can be protected by IP rights or as trade secrets, it is important to promote a balance between the need to promote data sharing on multiple levels and the need to safeguard legitimate interests of businesses, thereby ensuring a secure environment for all economic operators.
Amendment 233 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35 a (new)
Recital 35 a (new)
(35 a) The creation of a secure European federated digital identity system is of crucial importance. The Data Governance Act should ensure coherence with the EU Digital identity through which users shall access online services, have control over their data, be able to swiftly manage the consent they provide and properly enforce their rights, such as portability and their right to be forgotten.
Amendment 448 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
(1) Member States shall ensure that all relevant information concerning the application of Articles 5 and 6 is available through a single information point. It must be accessible to all relevant stakeholders, so as to ensure efficient operation and promote good collaboration with civil society organizations, social partners and professional organisations.
Amendment 450 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
(2) The single information point shall receive requests for the re-use of the categories of data referred to in Article 3 (1) and shall transmit them to the competent public sector bodies, or the competent bodies referred to in Article 7 (1), where relevant. The single information point shall make publicly available by electronic means a register of available data resources containing relevant information describing the nature of available data. At least the format, size, conditions for reuse such as characteristics of interoperability and portability and the data holder shall be made public.
Amendment 463 #
2020/0340(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) services of data cooperatives, that is to say services supporting data subjects or one-person companies or micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, including social economy enterprises, who are members of the cooperative or who confer the power to the cooperative to negotiate terms and conditions for data processing before they consent, in making informed choices before consenting to data processing, and allowing for mechanisms to exchange views on data processing purposes and conditions that would best represent the interests of data subjects or legal persons.
Amendment 38 #
2020/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) As confirmed by the case law of the CJEU 1a, state aid for activities that contravene rules of EU law on the environment cannot be declared compatible with the internal market. Therefore, measures by the European Commission under Articles 106 and 107 TFEU should be covered by the definition of an administrative act for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No1367/2006. _________________ 1aJudgement of the Court of Justice of 22 September2020 in Case C-594/18 P, Austria v. Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2020:742, at paras 42-44.
Amendment 40 #
2020/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 b (new)
Recital 11 b (new)
(11b) Article9(4) Aarhus Convention requires that court proceedings under the scope of Article 9(3) Aarhus Convention shall not be prohibitively expensive. In order to ensure that judicial proceedings under Article 12 Regulation (EC) 1367/2006 are not prohibitively expensive and that costs are foreseeable for the applicant, the EU institutions or bodies shall only make reasonable cost requests when they are successful in litigation and shall, in particular, not seek to pass on the costs of external representation.
Amendment 51 #
2020/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) ‘administrative act’ means any non- legislative act adopted by a Union institution or body, which has legally binding and external effects and contains provisions that may, because of their effects, contravene environmental law within the meaning of point (f) of Article 2(1), excepting those provisions of this act for which Union law explicitly requires implementing measures at Union or national level;
Amendment 53 #
2020/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006
Article 2 – paragraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 2
1a. Article 2(2) is replaced by the following: "Administrative acts and administrative omissions shall not include measures taken or omissions by a Community institution or body in its capacity as an administrative review body, such as under: (a) Articles 81, 82, 86 and 87 of the Treatyunder: (a) Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (competition rules); (b) Articles 226 and 228 of the Treaty58, 259 and 260 TFEU (infringement proceedings); (c) Article 195 of the Treaty228 TFEU (Ombudsman proceedings); (d) Article 280 of the Treaty325 TFEU (OLAF proceedings)."
Amendment 71 #
2020/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Amendment 73 #
2020/0289(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2b. The following paragraph shall be inserted: 2a. Without prejudice to the Court’s prerogative to apportion costs, it must be ensured that court proceedings initiated under this provision are not prohibitively expensive. Union institutions and bodies referred to in Article 10(1) shall not request that applicants pay costs exceeding a reasonable amount and shall, in any event, not request costs other than travel and subsistence expenses. In particular, Union institutions and bodies shall not request applicants to pay the remuneration of agents, advisers or lawyers.
Amendment 187 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) To this end, a comprehensive approach is required with the objective of reinforcing mutual trust between Member States which should bring together policy in the areas of asylum and migration management and towards relations with relevant third countries, recognising that the effectiveness of such an approach depends on all components being jointly addressed and in an integrated manner.
Amendment 201 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The common framework should bring together the management of the Common European Asylum System and that of migration policy. The objective of migration policy should be to ensure the efficient management of migration flows, the fair and dignified treatment of third- country nationals residing legallyand the respect of their human rights in Member States and the prevention of, and enhanced measures to combat, illegal migration and migrant smuggling. irregular migration, migrant smuggling and trafficking, through the development of legal pathways. The scope of this Regulation should also include beneficiaries of international protection, resettled or admitted persons, as well as persons granted immediate protection.
Amendment 212 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The common framework is needed in order to effectively address the increasing phenomenon of mixed arrivals of persons in need of international protection and those who are not and in recognition that the challenge of irregular arrivals of migrants in the Union should not have to be assumed by individual Member States alone, but by the Union as a whole. To ensure that Member States have the necessary tools to effectively manage this challenge in addition to applicants for international protection, irregular migrants should also fall within the scope of this Regulation. The scope of this Regulation should also include beneficiaries of international protection, resettled or admitted persons as well as persons granted immediate protection.
Amendment 258 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to ensure that the necessary tools are in place to assist Member States in dealing with challenges that may arise due to the presence on their territory of third-country nationals that are vulnerable applicants for international protection, regardless of how they crossed the external borders, the Report should also indicate whether the said Member States are faced with such challenges. Those Member States should alwayso be able to rely on the use of the ‘solidarity pool’ for the relocation of vulnerable personsbinding solidarity contributions foreseen in Article 45 and, if under migratory pressure, on those provided for in Article 51 (3).
Amendment 266 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) In order to effectively manage the Union's external border, an independent border monitoring mechanism should be set up in view of ensuring its compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, as well as the EU and International law.
Amendment 268 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 279 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 295 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility and a balance of effort between Member States, a binding solidarity mechanism should be established which is effective and ensures that applicants have swift acces, upon arrival and disembarkation, including following search and rescue activities and operations, should be established in order to ensure effective and swift access of applicants to the procedures for granting international protection. Such a mechanism should provide for different types of solidarity measures and should be flexible and able to adapt to the evolving nature of the migratory challenges facing a Member Statetrue solidarity as enshrined in Article 80 of the TFEU, among Member States, with third countries, and towards those seeking asylum according to the procedure foreseen in Article 14 and 45 of this Regulation.
Amendment 322 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Given the specific characteristics of disembarkations arising in the context of search and rescue operations conducted by Member States or private organisations whether under instruction from Member States or autonomously in the context of migration, this Regulation should provide for a specificn effective processdure applicable to people disembarked following those operations irrespective of whether there is a situation of migratory pressure.
Amendment 330 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Given the recurring nature of disembarkations from search and rescue operations on the different migratory routes, the annual Migration Management Report should set out the short-term projections of disembarkations anticipated for such operations and the solidarity response that would be required to contribute to the needs of the Member States of disembarkation. The Commission should adopt an implementing act establishing a pool of solidarity measures (‘the solidarity pool’) with the aim of assisting the Member State of disembarkation to address the challenges of such disembarkations. Such measures should comprise applicants for international protection that are not in the border procedure or measures in the field of strengthening of capacity in the field of asylum, reception and return, or operational support, or measures in the external dimension.
Amendment 335 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)
Recital 19 a (new)
(19a) In view of coordinating and optimising all relocation efforts, an EU Relocation Coordinator, to be appointed by the Commission, should assist and supervise the relocation coordination of applicants and beneficiaries found eligible for relocation. The EU Relocation Coordinator should endeavour to prioritise vulnerable persons, in particular unaccompanied minors in the relocation and transfers. The EU Relocation Coordinator should, in cooperation with the Commission and the Asylum Agency, also promote coherent working methods, for the verification of any meaningful links that the persons eligible for relocation might have with Member States of relocation.
Amendment 342 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to provide a timely response to the specific situation following disembarkations from search and rescue operations, the Commission, and the EU Relocation Coordinator, with the assistance of Union Agencies, should facilitate the swift relocation and transfer of eligible applicants for international protection who are not in the border procedure. Under the , accoordination of the Commission, the European Union Asylum Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency should draw up the list of eligible persons to be relocated indicating the distribution of those persons among the contributing Member Statesg to Article 14.
Amendment 358 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
Amendment 365 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) Where no meaningful links can be established, the share of solidarity contribution for each Member State shall follow the size of the population, the total GDP and its unemployment rate, according to the latest available Eurostat data.
Amendment 369 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
Amendment 381 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) TheA specific solidarity mechanism should also address the situations of migratory pressure in particular for those Member States which due to their geographical location are exposed to or likely to be exposed towhere one or more Member States, in particular, due to their geographical location and a constant level of arrivals, including after disembarkation and search and rescue activities and operations are under migratory pressure. For this purpose, the Commission should adopt a report identifying whether a Member State is under migratory pressure and setting out the measures that could support that Member State in addressing the situation of migratory pressure.
Amendment 392 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) When assessing whether a Member State is under migratory pressure the Commission, based on a broad qualitative and quantitative assessment, should take account of a broad range of factors, including the number of asylum applicants, irregular border crossings, return decisions issued and enforced, and relations with relevant third countriesvulnerabilities of asylum applicants and migrants, irregular border crossings, the capacity of a Member State in managing its asylum and reception caseload. The solidarity response should be designed on a case-by-case basis in order to be tailor- made to the needs of the Member State in question.
Amendment 404 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
Amendment 410 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
Amendment 424 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
Amendment 436 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
Amendment 454 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) In order to ensure a comprehensive and effective solidarity response and in order to give clarity to Member States receiving support, the Commission should adopt an implementing act specifying the contributions to be made by each Member State. Such contributions should always be based on the type of contributions indicated by the Member State concerned in the solidarity response plan, except where that Member State failed to submit one. In such cases, the measures set out in the implementing act for the Member State concerned should be determined by the Commission.
Amendment 460 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 465 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 477 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) has been built progressively as a common area of protection based on the full and inclusive application of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967 (‘the Geneva Convention’), thus ensuring that no person is sent back to persecution, in compliance with the principle of non- refoulement. In this respect, and without the responsibility criteria laid down in this Regulation being affected, Member States, all respectings long as they respect human rights and the principle of non- refoulement, are considered as safe countries for third- country nationals.
Amendment 484 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) It is appropriate that a clear and workable method for determining the Member State responsible for the examination of an application for international protection should be included in the Common European Asylum System40 . That method should be based on objective, fair criteria both for the Member States and for the persons concerned. It should, in particular, make it possible to determine rapidly the Member State responsible, so as to guarantee effective access to the procedures for granting international protection and not to compromise the objective of the rapid processing of applications for international protection, namely meaningful links. _________________ 40As set out by the European Council at its special meeting in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999.
Amendment 497 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) This Regulation should be based on the principles underlying Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council41 while developingand the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility as part of the common framework, in line with Article 80 of TFEU. To that end, athe new solidarity mechanism should enable a strengthened preparedness of Member States to manage migration, to address situations where Member States are faced with migratory pressure and to facilitate regular solidarity support among Member States. _________________ 41Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 31.
Amendment 503 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
Amendment 510 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
Amendment 537 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) In accordance with the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the best interests of the child should be a primary consideration of Member States when applying this Regulation. In assessing the best interests of the child, Member States should, in particular, take due account of the minor’s well-being and social development, safety and security considerations and the views of the minor in accordance with his or her age and maturity, including his or her background and should follow an independent evaluation of his or her best interest by the relevant child protection authorities. In addition, specific procedural guarantees for unaccompanied minors should be laid down on account of their particular vulnerability.
Amendment 554 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) In order to prevent that persons who represent a security risk are transferred among the Member States, it is necessary to ensure that the Member State where an application is first registered does not apply the responsibilty criteria or the benefitting Member State does not apply the relocation procedure where there are reasonable grounds to consider the person concerned a danger to national security or public order.
Amendment 569 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The definition of a family member in this Regulation should include the sibling or siblings of the applicant, grandparent or grandparents of the applicant. Reuniting siblingsfamily is of particular importance for improving the chances of integration of applicants and hence reducing unauthorised movements. The scope of the definition of family member should also reflect the reality of current migratory trends, according to which applicants often arrive to the territory of the Member States after a prolonged period of time in transit. The definition should therefore include families formed outside the country of origin, but before their arrival on the territory of the Member State. This limited and targeted enlargement of the scope of the definition is expected to reduce the incentive for some unauthorised movements of asylum seekers within the EU.
Amendment 574 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48
Recital 48
(48) In order to ensure full respect for the principle of family unity and for the best interests of the child, the existence of a relationship of dependency between an applicant and his or her child, sibling or parent on account of the applicant’s pregnancy or maternity, state of health or old age, should be a binding responsibility criterion. When the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the presence of a family member or relative on the territory of another Member State who can take care of him or her should also become a binding responsibility criterion. In order to discourage unauthorisedonwards movements of unaccompanied minors, which are not in their best interests, in the absence of a family member or a relative, the Member State responsible should be that where the unaccompanied minor’s application for international protection was first registered, unless it is demonstrated that this would notminor is present, unless it is assessed not to be in the best interests of the child. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to another Member State, the transferring Member State should make sure that that Member State will take all necessary and appropriate measures to ensure the adequate protection of the child, and. For unaccompanied minors, in particular, the prompt appointment of a representative or representativesguardian tasked with safeguarding respect for all the rights to which they are entitled, as well as prompt access for free legal assistance. When considering or implementing the transfer of a minor, Member States should promote and facilitate the continuity and stability of the support and assistance provided to a minor. Member states should promote and facilitate transnational cooperation between these actors, including sharing of information about the minor, with the informed consent of the minor. Any decision to transfer an unaccompanied minor should be preceded by an individual assessment of his or her best interests by staff with the necessary qualifications and expertise.
Amendment 600 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51
Recital 51
(51) Considering that a Member State should remain responsible for a person who has irregularly entered its territory, it is also necessary to include the situation when the person enters the territory following a search and rescue operation. A derogation from this responsibility criterion should be laid down for the situation where a Member State has relocated persons having crossed the external border of another Member State irregularly or, until the responsibility of another Member state has been determined, for a person who has irregularly entered its territory by land, air and sea, including after disembarkation and following a search and rescue operation. In such a situation, the Member State of relocation should be responsibile if the person applies for international protections and activities.
Amendment 605 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 52
Recital 52
(52) Any Member State should be able to derogate from the responsibility criteria in particular on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, in order to bring together family members, relatives or any other family relations and examine an application for international protection registered with it or with another Member State, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the binding criteria laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 611 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) In order to ensure that the procedures set out in this Regulation are respected and to prevent obstacles to the efficient application of this Regulation, in particular in order to avoid absconding and unauthorised movements betweenthe Member State and the competent authorities of the Member Sstates, it is necessary to establish clear obligations to be complied with by the applicant in the context of the procedure, of which he or she should be duly informed in a timely manner. Violation of those legal obassisted by the Asylum Agency, shall ensure as soon as possible that the third country national or stateless person who intends to make an appligcations should lead to appropriate and propor to internationatel procedural consequences for the applicant and to appropriate and proportionate consequences in terms of his or her reception conditions. In line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the Member State where such an applicant is present should in any case ensure that the immediate material needs of that person are coveredtection fully cooperates in matters covered by this Regulation, informing him or her of his or her rights and obligations.
Amendment 622 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) In order to limit the possibility for applicants’ behaviour to lead to the cessation or shift of responsibility to another Member State, rules allowing for cessation or shift of responsibility where the person leaves the territory of the Member States for at least three months during examination of the application or absconds to evade a transfer to the Member State responsible for more than 18 months should be deleted. The shift of responsibility when the time limit for sending a take back notification has not been respected by the notifying Member State should also be removed in order to discourage circumventing the rules and obstruction of procedure. In situations where a person has entered a Member State irregularly without applying for asylum, the period after which the responsibility of that Member State ceases and another Member State where that person subsequently applies becomes responsible should be extended, to further incentivise persons to comply with the rules and apply in the first Member State of entry and hence limit unauthorisedonwards movements and increase the overall efficiency of the CEAS.
Amendment 634 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) In order to guarantee effective protection of the rights of the persons concerned, legal safeguards and the right to an effective remedy in respect of decisions regarding transfers to the Member State responsible should be established, in accordance, in particular, with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In order to ensure that international law is respected, an effective remedy against such decisions should cover both the examination of the application of this Regulation and of the legal and factual situation in the Member State to which the applicant is transferred. The scope of the effective remedy should be limited to an assessment of whether applicants' fundamental rights to respect of family life, the rights of the child, or the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment risk to be infringed upon.
Amendment 640 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58
Recital 58
Amendment 656 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 59
Recital 59
(59) Minors and unaccompanied minors shall never be detained. The detention of applicants should be applied in accordance with the underlying principle that a person should not be held in detention for the sole reason that he or she is seeking international protection. Detention should be for as short a period as possible and subject to the principles of necessity and proportionality thereby only being allowed as a measure of last resort. In particular, the detention of applicants must be in accordance with Article 31 of the Geneva Convention. The procedures provided for under this Regulation in respect of a detained person should be applied as a matter of priority, within the shortest possible deadlines. As regards the general guarantees governing detention, as well as detention conditions, where appropriate, Member States should apply the provisions of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] also to persons detained on the basis of this Regulation.
Amendment 745 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) establishes a sustainable mechanism for solidarity as enshrined in Article 80 of the TFEU;
Amendment 766 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) ‘applicant’ means a third-country national or a stateless person who has made an application for international protection in respect of which a decision has not been taken, or has been taken and is either subject to or can still be subject to a remedy in the Member State concerned, irrespective of whether the applicant has a right to remain or is allowed to remain in accordance with Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation], including a person who has been granted immediate protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Regulation addressing situations of crisis and force majeure in the field of asylum and migration], and individuals awaiting an appeal decision;
Amendment 780 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part
(g) ‘family members’ means, insofar as the family already existed before the applicant or the family member arrived on the territory of the Member States, the following members of the applicant’s or beneficiaries' family who are present on the territory of the Member States:
Amendment 784 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i
(i) the spousepartner of the applicant or his or her unmarried partner in a stable relationship, where the law or practice of the Member State concerned treats unmarried couples in a way comparable to married couples under its law relating to third-country nationals,beneficiary;
Amendment 791 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point ii
(ii) the minor children of couplepartners referred to in the first indent or of the applicant, on condition that they are unmarriedr beneficiary, and regardless of whether they were born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law,
Amendment 797 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iii
(iii) where the applicant is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for the applicant, whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult is present,
Amendment 801 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iv
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point iv
(iv) where the beneficiary of international protection is a minor and unmarried, the father, mother or another adult responsible for him or her whether by law or by the practice of the Member State where the adult or beneficiary of international protection is present,
Amendment 810 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point g – point v
(v) the sibling or siblings, and the grandparent or grandparents of the applicant or beneficiary;
Amendment 815 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) ‘relative’ means the applicant’s adult aunt or uncle, or grandparentcousin who is present in the territory of a Member State, regardless of whether the applicant was born in or out of wedlock or adopted as defined under national law;
Amendment 827 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) ‘representativeguardian’ means a person or an organisation appointed by the competent bodies in order to assist and represent an unaccompanied minor in procedures provided for in this Regulation with a view to ensuring the best interests of the child and exercising legal capacity for the minor where necessary;
Amendment 831 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) “Meaningful links” means any of the following: the possession of a diploma or qualification, the lawful presence of relatives, being beneficiary of a sponsorship, strong linguistic and cultural ties, previous legal stays or residence;
Amendment 847 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q
(q) ‘risk of absconding’ means the existence of specific reasons and circumstances in an individual case, which are based on objective criteria clearly defined by national law to believe that an applicant who is subject to a transfer procedure may absconlaw in the light of specific circumstances of the persons involved;
Amendment 853 #
2020/0279(COD)
(r) ‘benefitting Member State’ means the Member State benefitting from the solidarity measures in situations of migratory pressure or for, including following disembarkations following and search and rescue activities and operations as set out in Chapters I-III of Part IV of this Regulation;
Amendment 861 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point t
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point t
Amendment 869 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u
(u) ‘relocation’ means the transfer of a third-country national or a stateless person, or a beneficiary of international protection from the territory of a benefitting Member State to the territory of a contributing Member State;
Amendment 870 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point u a (new)
(ua) the EU Relocation Coordinator is the person appointed by the Commission and defined in Article 13a of this Regulation and Article 2 (f) of the Crisis Regulation
Amendment 874 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point v
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point v
(v) ‘search and rescue operations’ means operations of search and rescue activities as referred to in the 1979 International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue adopted in Hamburg, Germany on 27 April 1979; , and operations as referred to in Article 10 of Regulation (EU) 656/20141a; _________________ 1aRegulation (EU) No 656/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing rules for the surveillance of the external sea borders in the context of operational cooperation coordinated by the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union.
Amendment 892 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point z
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point z
(z) ‘return decision’ means an administrative or judicial decision or act stating or declaring the stay of a third- country national to be illegalrregular and imposing or stating an obligation to return that respectspursuant to Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council54 ; _________________ 54 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98.
Amendment 894 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point aa
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point aa
(aa) ‘illegalrregularly staying third-country national’ means a third-country national who does not fulfil or no longer fulfils the conditions of entry as set out in Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 or other conditions for entry, stay or residence in a Member State.
Amendment 913 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 927 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 933 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 945 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) effective management of the Union’s external borders, based on the European integrated border managthrough the creation and development of an adequately resourced independent monitoring mechanism in line with Article 18 and 19 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the principle of non-refoulement;
Amendment 965 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) determination of the Member State responsible for the examination of an application for international protection, based on shared responsibility and rules and mechanisms for solidarity, as enshrined in Article 80 the TFEU;
Amendment 976 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j
Amendment 985 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point l
Amendment 991 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point m
Amendment 1023 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. In implementing their obligations, the Member States shall observe the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, as enshrined in Article 80 of the TFEU, and shall take into account the shared interest in the effective functioning of the Union’s asylum and migration management policies. Member States shall:
Amendment 1047 #
2020/0279(COD)
(b) take all measures necessary and proportionate to reduce and prevent irregular migration to the territories of the Member States, in close cooperation and partnership with relevant third countries, including as regards the prevention and fight against migrant smugglingto ensure genuine and effective access to means of legal entry in cooperation with relevant third countries;
Amendment 1056 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) provide and invest in adequate reception conditions, including measures to protect those with special needs;
Amendment 1061 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) apply correctly and expeditiously the rules on the determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection and, where necessary, carry out the transfer to the Member State responsible pursuant to Chapters I-VI of Part III, Chapter I of Part IV;
Amendment 1071 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 1106 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) relevant reports and analyses from Union agencies, including the Fundamental Rights Agency;
Amendment 1108 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d
Amendment 1111 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Amendment 1135 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 6
Article 6 – paragraph 6
6. The Commission shall monitor and provide information on the migratory situation through regular situational reports based on good quality data and information provided by Member States, the External Action Service, the Asylum Agency, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, Europol and the Fundamental Rights Agency and notably the information gathered within the framework of the Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint and its Network, and reports provided by the organizations in Article 6 (2) (da).
Amendment 1140 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7
Article 7
Amendment 1185 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2
Article 8 – paragraph 2
2. Where no Member State responsible can be designated on the basis of the criteria listed in this Regulation, the first Member State in whichresponsible for examining the application for international protection was registered shall be responsible for examining itshall be determined in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 45.
Amendment 1200 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where a Member State cannot carry out the transfer pursuant to the first subparagraph to any Member State designated on the basis of the criteria set out in Chapter II of Part III or of the procedure laid down in Chapter I of Part IV, or to the first Member State with which the application was registered, that Member State shall become the Member State responsible.
Amendment 1204 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1216 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Member State in which the applicant or a beneficiary of international protection is present shall, however, ensure that the designation of the Member State responsible does not worsen a situation where the fundamental rights of that applicant have been infringed by using a procedure for determining the Member State responsible which takes an unreasonable length of time. If necessary, that Member State must itself examine the application in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article25.
Amendment 1219 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Amendment 1223 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Amendment 1254 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10
Article 10
Amendment 1272 #
Amendment 1273 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 11 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. As soon as possible the Member State and the competent authorities of the Member State, assisted by the Asylum Agency, shall ensure that the third country national or stateless person, who intends to make an application to international protection, fully cooperates in matters covered by this Regulation, by informing him or her:
Amendment 1274 #
Amendment 1285 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1292 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) of the objectives of this Regulation, the criteria and the procedures for determining the Member State responsible, the hierarchy of such criteria in the different steps of the procedure and their duration, including the specific criteria applied by Member states requested or notified in the individual case;
Amendment 1299 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) of the aim of the personal interview pursuant to Article 12 and the obligation to submit and substantiate orally or through the provision of documents information as soon as possible in the procedure any relevant information that could help to establish the presence of family members, relatives or any other family relations in the Member States, including the means by which the applicant can submit such information, as well as any assistance that the Member State can offer with regard to the tracing of family members or relatives;
Amendment 1300 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the applicant shall be informed that his or her absconding may prejudice the conduct of the interview and that, in any case, he or she has the right to ask for the interview to be conducted;
Amendment 1302 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) of the obligation for the applicant to disclose, as soon as possible in the procedure any relevant information that could help to establish any prior residence permits, visas or educational diplomas;. The competent authorities shall take into account the elements and information relevant for determining the Member state responsible submitted at any stage of the procedure, provided they have been submitted before the final decision determining the Member State responsible. In the period between the final decision and the actual transfer to a designated Member State, other relevant elements provided by the applicant shall be taken into consideration if the delay in submitting them is due to justified reasons.
Amendment 1311 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) of the possibility to challenge a transfer decision within the time limit set out in Article 33(2) and of the fact that the scope of that challenge is limited as laid down in Article 33(1)existence of the rights to have an effective remedy with automatic suspensive effect before a Court or a Tribunal in accordance with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, including in a situation where no transfer decision is taken;
Amendment 1319 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) of the right to be granted, on request, legal and linguistic assistance free of charge at all stages of the procedure, where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved;
Amendment 1323 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) of the possibility under Article 25 to request the discretionary clause to be applied by any Member State from the Member State where they are present, as well as of the specific arrangements relating to the procedure;
Amendment 1328 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) in the case of an unaccompanied minor, of the role and responsibilities of the representativeguardian and of the procedure to file complaints against a representativeguardian in confidence and safety and in full respect of the child's right to be heard in this respect;
Amendment 1332 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point l
Amendment 1336 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be provided in writingthe mother tongue of the applicant or, if not possible, in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand. Member States shall use the common information material drawn up in clear and plain language pursuant to paragraph 3 for that purpose. . In both cases the information shall be provided in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language. Member States shall use the common information material drawn up in clear and plain language pursuant to paragraph 3 for that purpose. The information shall be provided in writing and orally, where appropriate with the support of multimedia equipment. Oral information may be given either in individual or group sessions and applicants shall have the possibility to ask questions about the procedural steps they are expected to follow with regard to the process of determining a Member State responsible in accordance with this Regulation. When the applicant is a minor, information shall be provided in a child-friendly manner, including in both written and oral forms by appropriately trained staff and with the involvement of the guardian, notably about the process to identify family members or relatives in accordance with Article 15 of this Regulation.
Amendment 1343 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1350 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The Asylum Agency shall, in close cooperation with the responsible national agencies, draw up common information material, as well as a specific leaflet for unaccompanied minors, containing at least the information referred to in paragraph 1. That common information material shall also include information regarding the application of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] and, in particular, the purpose for which the data of an applicant may be processed within Eurodac. The common information material shall be drawn up in such a manner as to enable Member States to complete it with additional Member State-specific information. The European Union Agency for Asylum shall create specific information material intended particularly for the following target groups: (a) adult applicants; (b) unaccompanied minors; (c) accompanied minors.
Amendment 1354 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The competent authorities of the Member States shall keep the applicants informed of the progress of the procedures carried out under this Regulation with regard to their application. The information shall be provided in writing at regular intervals, at least every two weeks. In the case of minors, the competent authorities shall, in accordance with the same arrangements, inform both the minor and the parent or guardian. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt implementing acts to establish the arrangements for the provision of such information.
Amendment 1357 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Amendment 1358 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. In order to facilitate the process of determining the Member State responsible, the determining Member Statecompetent authorities of the determining Member State, assisted by the Asylum Agency, shall conduct a personal interview with the applicant. The interview shall also allow the proper understanding of the information supplied to the applicant in accordance with Article 11specific individual situation of the applicant and of the information he or she supplied in accordance with Article 11. The determining Member State shall proactively ask questions on all aspects of the claim that would allow for the determination of the Member States responsible. In any case, the presence of the legal representative of the applicant or of a representative of an institution for the protection and assistance of asylum seekers registered in the Member State shall be allowed at the interview.
Amendment 1364 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1373 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3
Article 12 – paragraph 3
3. The personal interview shall take place in a timely manner and, in any event, before any take charge request is made pursuant to Article 29 or take back request pursuant to Article 31.
Amendment 1379 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4
Article 12 – paragraph 4
4. The personal interview shall be conducted in the mother tongue of the applicant or in a language that the applicant understands or is reasonably supposed to understand and in which he or she is able to communicate. Interviews of unaccompanied minors shall be conducted in a child- friendly manner, by staff who are appropriately trained and qualified under national law, in the presence of the representativeguardian and, where applicable, the minor’s legal advisor. Where necessary, Member States shall have recourse to an interpreter, and where appropriate a cultural mediator, who is able to ensure appropriate communication between the applicant and the person conducting the personal interview. The applicant may request to be interviewed and assisted by staff of the same sex.
Amendment 1390 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Member State shall ensure that there are appropriate standard operating procedures in place in order to ensure that appropriate protection measures are taken with respect to applicants at risk of being exploited for the purposes of trafficking in human beings or other organised crime activities.
Amendment 1394 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Article 12 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1405 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Each Member State where an unaccompanied minor is presents shall ensure that he or she isminors are represented and assisted by a representativeguardian with respect to the relevant procedures provided for in this Regulation. The representativeguardian shall have the resources, qualifications, training and, expertise and independence to ensure that the best interests of the minor are taken into consideration during the procedures carried out under this Regulation. Such representative shall have access to the content of the relevant documents in the applicant’s file including the specific information material for unaccompanied minors.minors, and shall inform the child accordingly about the procedure. The guardian shall be appointed as soon as possible but, at the latest, within two days after the arrival, and in any event prior to the collection of biometric data pursuant to Articles 10, 13 and 14a of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX (Eurodac Regulation)
Amendment 1411 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where an organisation is appointed as a representativeguardian, it shall designate a person responsible for carrying out its duties in respect of the minor. The first subparagraph shall apply to that person.
Amendment 1414 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The representativeguardian provided for in the first subparagraph may be the same person or organisation as provided for in Article 22 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation].
Amendment 1416 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The representative of an unaccompanied minor shall bguardian shall represent the minvolvedor in the process of establishing the Member State responsible under this Regulation. T and any other representativeight recognized to the minor. The guardian shall assist the unaccompanied minor to provide information relevant to the assessment of his or her best interests in accordance with paragraph 4, including the exercise of the right to be heard, and shall support his or her engagement with other actors, such as family tracing organisations, where appropriate for that purpose. , and with due regard to confidentiality obligations to the minor. The guardian shall ensure the minor has access to information, legal advice and representation concerning the procedures under this Regulation and shall keep the minor informed on the progress in the procedures under this Regulation concerning him or her. The guardian shall have access to the content of the relevant documents in the minor's file including the specific information material for unaccompanied minors and the forms provided for in Article 6. Guardians shall receive regular training and support to undertake their tasks.
Amendment 1424 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. In assessing the best interests of the child, Member States shall closely cooperate with each other and shall, in particular, take due account of the following factorsnon-exhaustive list of factors and rights of the child:
Amendment 1436 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b
(b) the minor’s well-being and social development, taking into particular consideration the minor’s backgroundethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic background and further having regard to the need for stability and continuity in care and custodial arrangements and access to health and education services;
Amendment 1449 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c
(c) safety and security considerations, in particular where there is a risk of the minor being a victim of any form of violence and exploitation, including trafficking in human beings or violence within the family;
Amendment 1451 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
(ca) situations of vulnerability, including psycho-physical trauma, specific health needs and disability;
Amendment 1458 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d a (new)
(da) the need for decisions concerning minors to be treated with priority;
Amendment 1459 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point d b (new)
(db) In assessing the best interests of the minor, the minor's right to be heard must be guaranteed to every child capable of forming his or her own views.
Amendment 1461 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point e
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point e
(e) where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, the information provided by the representativeguardian in the Member State where the unaccompanied minor is present.
Amendment 1467 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. Before transferring an unaccompanied minor to the Member State responsible or, where applicable, to the Member State of relocation, the transferring Member State shall make surobtain guarantees assessed on the individual case that the Member State responsible or the Member State of relocation takes the measures referred to in Articles 14 and 23 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] and Article 22 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Procedure Regulation] without delay. Any decision to transfer an unaccompaniedor not transfer a minor shall be preceded by an individual and multidisciplinary assessment of his/her best interests. The assessment shall be based on the factors listed in paragraph 4 and the conclusions of the assessment on these factors shall be clearly stated in the transfer decision. The assessment shall be done swiftly by multidisciplinary staff with the qualifications and expertise to ensure that the best interests of the minor are taken into consideration. The multidisciplinary assessment shall involve competent staff with expertise in child protection and child psychology and development and shall also include, as a minimum, the minor’s guardian and legal advisor. Before the transfer of a minor, the receiving Member State shall appoint a guardian as soon as possible, but in any event within five working days of the confirmation of the transfer decision. The competent authorities shall communicate the information regarding the guardian appointed by the receiving Member State to the current guardian together with the arrangements for the transfer.
Amendment 1480 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
To that end, that Member State may call for the assistance of international or other relevant organisations, and may facilitate the minor’s access to the tracing services of such organisations., as soon as possible after an application for international protection is made, whilst protecting his or her best interest. In cases where there may be a threat to the life or integrity of the minor or his or her close relatives, particularly if they have remained in the country of origin, care must be taken to ensure that the collection, processing and circulation of information concerning those persons is undertaken on a confidential basis, so as to avoid jeopardising their safety
Amendment 1484 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
The staff of the competent authorities referred to in Article 41 who deal with requests concerning unaccompanied minors shall have received, and shall continue to receive, appropriate training concerning the specific needs of minors, including training on rights of the child and child psychology and development. Such training shall also include modules on risk assessment to target care and protection depending on the individual needs of the minor, with a specific focus on early identification of victims of trafficking in human beings and of abuse, as well as training on good practices to prevent disappearance.
Amendment 1491 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. With a view to facilitating the appropriate action to identify the family members or relatives of the unaccompanied minor living in the territory of another Member State pursuant to paragraph 6, the Commission shall adopt implementing acts including a standard form for the exchange of relevant information between Member States. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1492 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Amendment 1494 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – title
Article 14 – title
Hierarchy of criteria upon arrival and disembarkation, including following search and rescue operations
Amendment 1497 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 1500 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. That Member State, assisted by the Asylum Agency, shall arrange, upon arrival or after disembarkation, including following search and rescue operations and activities, for an interview with the applicant in order to identify his or her meaningful links with one or more member States including that of arrival. The applicant has the right to be informed and cooperate in line with article 11 of this Regulation.
Amendment 1501 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Amendment 1502 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. The Member State of entry, in cooperation with the Asylum Agency, shall inform the applicant of the determination and of the arrangements of the transfer to the Member State responsible for the examination, in accordance to Article 32 of this Regulation.
Amendment 1503 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 e (new)
Article 14 – paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. If no meaningful links with a Member State are established or no criteria listed in this Chapter are applicable, the procedure established in Article 45 of this Regulation shall apply.
Amendment 1505 #
Amendment 1506 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 15 – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Where a minor is accompanied by one parent, adult sibling or other adult who holds parental responsibility for the minor, whether by law or by the practice of that Member State, and one parent or other adult who holds parental responsibility for the minor, whether by law or by the practice of that Member State, is legally present in a Member State, the determination of the Member State responsible shall be based on the objective of prioritising family unity, taking into account the best interest of the child.
Amendment 1509 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The Member State responsible shall be that where a family member of the unaccompanied minor is legally present, unlessif it is demonstrated that it is not in the best interests of the minor. Where the applicant is a married minor whose spouse is not legally present on the territory of the Member Statesin the best minor's best interest. Where the applicant is a minor, the Member State responsible shall be the Member State where the father, mother, grandparents or other adult responsible for the minor, whether by law or by the practice of that Member State, or sibling is legally present.
Amendment 1518 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Article 15 – paragraph 5
5. In the absence of a family member or a relative as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, the Member State responsible shall be that where the unaccompanied minor’s application for international protection was first registered is present, unless it is demonstrated that this is not in the best interests of the minor.
Amendment 1529 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 7
Article 15 – paragraph 7
7. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish uniform conditions for the consultation and the exchange of information between Member States. The implementing acts shall promote the ability of the guardian and legal assistance provider to seek assistance in another State so as to gain information about the circumstances of reception and care arrangements in the other country or family reunion possibilities. This may involve contact with guardianship authority, information on access to legal assistance in the event of need to appeal. The implementing acts shall also promote and facilitate cooperation between guardians and legal assistance providers between States in the event a transfer of a minor is being contemplated or implemented, including providing for sharing of information about the minor, with the informed consent of the minor. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1534 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Family members who are beneficiaries of international protectionlegally reside in a Member state
Amendment 1536 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Where the applicant has a family member who has been allowed to reside as a beneficiary of international protection, regardless of whether the family was previously formed in the country of origin, who is legally residing in a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.
Amendment 1541 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Where the applicant has a family member in a Member State whose application for international protection in that Member State has not yet been the subject of a first decision regarding the substance, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application for international protection, provided that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.
Amendment 1554 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 4
Article 19 – paragraph 4
4. Where the applicant is in possession of one or more residence documents or one or more visas which expired less than three years before the application was registered, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall apply.
Amendment 1556 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19a Previous stays If the applicant has resided legally for at least two years in a Member state with a valid residence permit, the Member state shall be responsible for examining his or her application for international protection.
Amendment 1567 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21
Article 21
Amendment 1582 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22
Article 22
Amendment 1589 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23
Article 23
Application in an international transit Where the application for international protection is made in the international transit area of an airport of a Member State by a third-country national or a stateless person, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.rticle 23 deleted area of an airport
Amendment 1597 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where, on account of pregnancy, having a new-born child, serious illness, severe disability, severe trauma or old age,trauma, old age, or other relevant psychological and/or physical vulnerabilities an applicant is dependentin need onf the assistance of his or her child or , sibling, parent, or grandparent legally resident in one of the Member States, or his or her child or , sibling, parent or grandparent legally resident in one of the Member States is dependentn need onf the assistance of the applicant, Member States shall normally keep or bring together the applicant with that child or , sibling, parent, or grandparent, provided that family ties existed before the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member States, that the child or the child, sibling, parent or grandparent or the applicant is able to take care of the dependent person and that the persons concerned expressed their desire in writing.
Amendment 1600 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where there are indications that a child or , sibling, parent or grandparent is legally resident on the territory of the Member State where the dependent person is present, that Member State shall verify whether the child or , sibling, parent or grandparent can take care of the dependent person, before making a take charge request pursuant to Article 29.
Amendment 1607 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. Where the child or , sibling, parent or grandparent referred to in paragraph 1 is legally resident in a Member State other than the one where the applicant is present, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the child or parent is legally resident unless the applicant’s health prevents him or her from travelling to that Member State for a significant period of time, sibling, parent or grandparent is legally resident . In such a case, the Member State responsible shall be the one where the applicant is present. Such Member State shall not be subject to the obligation to bring the child or , sibling, parent or grandparent of the applicant to its territory.
Amendment 1613 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 a (new)
Article 24 a (new)
Article 24 a Sponsorship 1. A Member State may provide the possibility that recognised organisations working in that Member State in the field of refugee protection programmes and prevention of trafficking in human beings become the sponsor of an applicant who has applied for international protection in the Union. The sponsoring organization shall arrange for the applicant's relocation and stay in the Member State until a final decision is taken on his or her application for international protection. 2. If the Member State in which the organization is established agrees to take charge of the applicant, it becomes the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection.
Amendment 1615 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. By way of derogation from Article 8(1), each Member State may decide to examine an application for international protection by a third-country national or a stateless person registerlodged with it, even if such examination is not its responsibility under the criteria laid down in this Regulation.
Amendment 1618 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Member State in which an application for international protection is registered and which is carrying out the process of determining the Member State responsible, or the Member State responsible, may, at any time before a first decision regarding the substance is taken, request another Member State to take charge of an applicant in order to bring together any family relations, on humanitarian grounds based in particular on family or, cultural considerations or social ties, language skills or other meaningful links which would facilitate his or her integration into that other Member state, even where that other Member State is not responsible under the criteria laid down in Articles 15 to 18 and 24. The persons concerned shall express their consent in writing.
Amendment 1620 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The requested Member State shall carry out any necessary checks to examine the humanitarian grounds cited, and shall reply to the requesting Member State within twoone months of receipt of the request using the electronic communication network set up under Article 18 of Regulation (EC) No 1560/2003. A reply refusing the request shall state the reasons on which the refusal is based. Where the requested Member State accepts the request, responsibility for examining the application shall be transferred to it.
Amendment 1629 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 a (new)
Article 25 a (new)
Article 25 a Light Family procedure 1. The determining Member State shall be responsible for conducting a special family reunification procedure for the applicant in order to ensure swift family reunification and access to the asylum procedures for applicants where there are, prima facie, sufficient indicators showing that they are likely to have the right to family reunification in accordance with Article 13, 15, 16, 24a. 2. If it is determined pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 that an applicant has, prima facie, the right to family reunification in accordance with Article 13, 15, 16 24a, the determining Member State shall notify the Member State of allocation thereof and the applicant shall be transferred to that Member State. 3. In accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 2, the Member State of allocation shall make the determination of whether the conditions for family reunification in accordance with Article 18 are met. If this is the case the Member state of allocation shall become the Member State responsible.
Amendment 1640 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1649 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 26 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 1659 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The first subparagraph shall not apply if the person has already been granted international protection by the responsible Member State, provided that the beneficiary does not claim before a judge that in the Member State primarily designated as responsible there are substantial grounds for believing that he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatments and punishments, in contrast with Article 4 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, pursuant to Article 8 (3).
Amendment 1667 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The obligations specified in Article 26 shall cease where the Member State responsible can establish, when requested to take charge of or take back an applicant or another person as referred in Article 26, that the person concerned has left the territory of the Member States for at least three months, unless the person concerned is in possession of a valid residence document issued by the Member State responsible. An application registered after the period of absence referred to in the first subparagraph shall be regarded as a new application giving rise to a new procedure for determining the Member State responsible.
Amendment 1700 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, in the case of a Eurodac hit with data recorded pursuant to Articles 13 and 14a of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation] or of a VIS hit with data recorded pursuant to Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 767/2008, the request to take charge shall be sent within onetwo months of receiving that hit.
Amendment 1704 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3
Where the applicant is an unaccompanied minor, or the determining Member State may, where it considers that it is in the best interest of the minorrequest is based on Article 16 or 17, the determining Member State may, continue the procedure for determining the Member State responsible and request another Member State to take charge of the applicant despite the expiry of the time limits laid down in the first and second subparagraphs. With regard to minors, for the purpose of calculating the deadlines referred to in the first and second subparagraphs of this paragraph, time shall start to run when a guardian has been appointed and when the best interests assessment pursuant to Article 13, 15, 16, 17, 25a has been concluded.
Amendment 1739 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – title
Article 31 – title
Submitting a take back notificationrequest
Amendment 1745 #
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 notificationrequest without delay and in any event within two weeks after receiving the Eurodac hit. Where the take back request is not made within the established time limit, the responsibility for examining the application for international protection shall lie with the Member State where the applicant is present.
Amendment 1763 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
3. The notifirequested Member State shall aconfirm receipt of the notification torequest of the Member State which made the notificationrequest within onefour weeks, unless the notifirequested Member State can demonstrate within that time limit that its is not responsibility has ceasedle pursuant to Article 27.
Amendment 1768 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 4
Article 31 – paragraph 4
4. Failure to act within the onefour-weeks period set out in paragraph 3 shall be tantamount to confirming the receipt of the notificationrequest.
Amendment 1774 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, adopt uniform conditions for the preparation and submission of take back notificationrequests. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 67(2).
Amendment 1781 #
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 one week of the acceptance or notification.
Amendment 1788 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 2
Article 32 – paragraph 2
2. Where the requested Member State accepts to take charge of an applicant or to take back a person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), the requesting or the notifying Member State shall notify the person concerned in writing without delayin one week of the decision to transfer him or her to the Member State responsible and, where applicable, of the fact that it will not examine his or her application for international protection.
Amendment 1793 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 32 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall be written in a language understandable to the applicant and contain information on the legal remedies available, including on the right to apply for suspensive effect, and on the time limits applicable for seeking such remedies and for carrying out the transfer, and shall, if necessary, contain information on the place where, and the date on which, the person concerned is required to appear, if that person is travelling to the Member State responsible by his or her own means.
Amendment 1808 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d) shall have the right to an effective remedy with automatic suspensive effect, in the form of an appeal or a review, in fact and in law, against a transfer decision, before a court or tribunal.
Amendment 1811 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1823 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The person concerned shall have the right to request, within a reasonable period of Member States shall ensure that an effectimve from the notificationremedy shall confer ofn the transfer decision, a court or tribunal to suspend the implementation of the transfer decisionperson concerned the right to remain in the Member state concerned pending the outcome of his or ther appeal or review. Member States shall ensure that an effective remedy is in place by suspending the transfer, the transfer shall be automatically suspended until the decision on the first suspension request is taken. Any decision on whether to suspend the implementation of the transfer decision shall be taken within one month of the date when that request reached the competent court or tribunal.
Amendment 1826 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1834 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Member States shall ensure that legal assistance is granted on request free of charge, at all stages of the procedure, where the person concerned cannot afford the costs involved, according to Article 11a of this Regulation. Member States may provide that, as regards fees and other costs, the treatment of persons subject to this Regulation shall not be more favourable than the treatment generally accorded to their nationals in matters pertaining to legal assistance.
Amendment 1838 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1844 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1845 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1848 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4
Legal assistance shall include at least the preparation of the required procedural documents and representation before a court or tribunal and may be restricted to legal advisors or counsellors specifically designated by national law to provide assistance and representationbe in line with Article 11a.
Amendment 1850 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 5
Article 33 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 5
Amendment 1853 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall not hold a person in detention for the sole reason that he or she is subject to the procedure established by this Regulation. Detention shall, in any case, be a measure of last resort when alternatives are not available.
Amendment 1858 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Minors, whether accompanied or unaccompanied, and vulnerable people according to Directive 2013/33 shall not be detained. In accordance with the principle of family unity, parents or legal or customary primary caregivers shall not be detained. Unaccompanied minors shall be placed in appropriate alternative care settings in the national child protection system in line with their best interest and taking into consideration their views and needs. Families with minor children shall be accommodated together in non- custodial, community-based placements while their immigration status is being resolved.
Amendment 1866 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
2. Where there is a proven risk of absconding, Member States, as measure of last resort, may detain the person concerned in order to secure a transfer proceduresafter a final transfer decision has been taken and notified in accordance with this Regulation, on the basis of an individual assessment and only in so far as detention is proportional and other less coercive alternative measures cannot be applied effectively, based on an individual assessment of the person’s circumstances.
Amendment 1874 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Detention shall be for as short a period as possible and shall be for no longer than the time reasonably necessary to fulfil the required administrative procedures with due diligence until the transfer under this Regulation is carried out, and in any case shall not exceed three months.
Amendment 1883 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 34 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where an applicant or another person referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d) is detained pursuant to this Article, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notificationrequest shall not exceed two weeks from the registration of the application. Where a person is detained at a later stage than the registration of the application, the period for submitting a take charge request or a take back notification shall not exceed one week from the date on which the person was placed in detention. The Member State carrying out the procedure in accordance with this Regulation shall ask for an urgent reply on a take charge request. Such reply shall be given within one week of receipt of the take charge request. Failure to reply within the one-week period shall be tantamount to accepting the take charge request and shall entail the obligation to take charge of the person, including the obligation to provide for proper arrangements for arrival.
Amendment 1895 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4
Article 34 – paragraph 4
4. Where a person is detained pursuant to this Article, the detention shall be ordered in writing by judicial authorities. The detention order shall state the reasons in fact and in law on which it is based and shall contain a reference to the consideration of the available alternatives and the reasons as to way they could not be applied effectively.
Amendment 1899 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5
Article 34 – paragraph 5
5. As regards the detention conditions, which shall fully respect the person's fundamental rights and the guarantees applicable to applicants detained, in order to secure the transfer procedures to the Member State responsible, Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Directive XXX/XXX/EU [Reception Conditions Directive] shall apply.
Amendment 1906 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) and (d), from the requesting or notifying Member State to the Member State responsible shall be carried out in accordance with the national law of the requesting or notifying Member State, after consultation between the Member States concerned, as soon as practically possible, and at the latest within six months of the acceptance of the take charge request or of the confirmation of the take back notificationrequest by another Member State or of the final decision on an appeal or review of a transfer decision where there is a suspensive effect in accordance with Article 33(3). That time limit may be extended up to a maximum of one year if the transfer cannot be carried out due to imprisonment of the person concerned for criminal purposes.
Amendment 1929 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1934 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 36 – paragraph 1
Article 36 – paragraph 1
1. In accordance with Article 17 of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum and Migration Fund], a contribution shall be paid to the Member State carrying out the transfer for theThe costs necessary to transfer of an applicant or another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), pursuant to Article 35to the Member state responsible shall be met by the General Budget of the Union.
Amendment 1939 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 1
Article 37 – paragraph 1
1. The Member State carrying out the transfer of an applicant or of another person as referred to in Article 26(1), point (b), (c) or (d), shall communicate to the Member State responsible such personal data concerning the person to be transferred as is adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary for the sole purposes of ensuring that the competent authorities, in accordance with national law in the Member State responsible, are in a position to provide that person with adequate assistance, including the provision of immediate health care required in order to protect his or her vital interests, to ensure continuity in the protection and rights afforded by this Regulation and by other applicable asylum legal instruments. Those data shall be communicated to the Member State responsible within a reasonable period of time before a transfer is carried out, in order to ensure that its competent authorities in under national law have sufficient time to take the necessary measures.
Amendment 1994 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3
Article 42 – paragraph 3
3. Before concluding or amending any arrangement as referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), the Member States concerned shall consult the Commission as to the compatibility of the arrangement with this Regulation and with other relevant provisions of EU Law, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 1995 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 4
Article 42 – paragraph 4
4. If the Commission considers the arrangements referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), to be incompatible with this Regulation, and with any other relevant provisions of EU Law including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, it shall, within a reasonable period, notify the Member States concerned. The Member States shall take all appropriate steps to amend the arrangement concerned within a reasonable time in such a way as to eliminate any incompatibilities observed.
Amendment 2015 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Solidarity contributions for the benefit of a Member State under migratory pressureof first entry or subject to disembarkations following, including after search and rescue operations shall consist of the followand activities shall be established according to the procedure provided ing types:his Article.
Amendment 2020 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 2034 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 2036 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 2045 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 45 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 2058 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where no meaningful links can be established, the Commission, assisted by the Asylum Agency, shall identify the Member State with the lowest number of applicants in relation to its share, calculated on the basis of the distribution key, as the Member State responsible. The European Commission will immediately notify this Member State which will be responsible for examining the application and the Member State of first entry.
Amendment 2061 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. The Member State of first entry, in cooperation with the Asylum Agency, shall immediately inform the applicant about the determination of responsibility as referred to in paragraph2 of this Article, and of the arrangements of the transfer to the Member State responsible for the examination, in accordance to Article 32 of this Regulation.
Amendment 2062 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. The procedure established by this Article shall apply to applicants arrived in a Member State by land, air or sea, including after disembarkation and following search and rescue operations and activities.
Amendment 2063 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 1 d (new)
Article 45 – paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. The share calculated according to the distribution key may be adjusted when a Member State demonstrates that over the proceeding 10 years it has been responsible for twice the Union average per capita of applicants for international protection.
Amendment 2067 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Article 45 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2086 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 46
Article 46
Article 46 deleted Solidarity Forum shall comprise all Member States. The Commission shall convene and preside the Solidarity Forum in order to ensure the smooth functioning of this Part.
Amendment 2105 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – title
Article 47 – title
47 Solidarity for disembarkations following search and rescue activities and operations
Amendment 2107 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 1
Article 47 – paragraph 1
1. This Article and Articles 148 and 495 shall also apply to search and rescue oparrivals, connected to search and rescue activities as referred to in the 1979 Internations that generate recurring arrivalsal Convention Maritime on Search and Rescue adopted in Hamburg, Germany, on 27 April 1979, and operations as referred to in Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No656/2014, leading to disembarkation of third- country nationals orand stateless persons on to the territory of a Member State and to vulnerable persons as set out in Article 49(4).
Amendment 2112 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 2
Article 47 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Migration Management Report referred to in Article 6(4) indicates that one or more Member States faced with the situations referred to in paragraph 1, it shall also set out the total number of applicants for international protection referred to in Article 45(1), point (a) that would need to be relocated in order to assist those Member States. The report shall also identify any capacity-building measures referred to in Article 45(1), point (d) which are necessary to assist the Member State concernedIn the context of disembarkations following search and rescue activities and operations, as defined in paragraph 1, the special needs of children, including unaccompanied minors, victims of trafficking in human beings, persons in need of urgent medical assistance, disabled persons, persons in need of international protection and other persons in a particularly vulnerable situation, shall be addressed as a matter of urgency and in a spirit of solidarity, pursuant to Articles 14 and 45.
Amendment 2114 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 3
Article 47 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2118 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Article 47 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2132 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 2140 #
Amendment 2177 #
Amendment 2207 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) that Member State has informed the Commission that it considers itself to be under migratory pressure; and
Amendment 2211 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) on the basis of available information, it considers that aone or more Member States may be under migratory pressure, due to a constant level of arrivals, including after disembarkation, which would undermine the effective functioning of the procedures foreseen in Articles 14 and 45 of this Regulation.
Amendment 2216 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2
Article 50 – paragraph 2
2. The Asylum Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall assist the Commission in drawing up the assessment of migratory pressure, in cooperation with the Member States in question. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament, the Council and the Member States concerned, without delay, that it is undertaking an assessment.
Amendment 2221 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the total number of applications for international protection by third-country nationals and the nationality of the applicants;
Amendment 2223 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 2227 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 2230 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point d
Amendment 2235 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point f
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point f
Amendment 2239 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point g
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point g
Amendment 2242 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point h
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point h
(h) the number of persons apprehendidentified in connection with an irregular crossing of the external land, sea or air border;
Amendment 2245 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point i
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point i
Amendment 2249 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point j
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point j
(j) the number and nationality of third- country nationals disembarked and following search and rescue operations and activities, including the number of applications for international protection;
Amendment 2251 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point k
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point k
(k) the number of vulnerable migrants, in particular unaccompanied minors.
Amendment 2254 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point k a (new)
Article 50 – paragraph 3 – point k a (new)
(ka) the capacity of the Member States under migratory pressure, in particular in its overall needs in managing its asylum and reception caseload.
Amendment 2260 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 4 – point b
Article 50 – paragraph 4 – point b
Amendment 2263 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 4 – point f
Article 50 – paragraph 4 – point f
Amendment 2267 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 4 – point h
Article 50 – paragraph 4 – point h
Amendment 2275 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 51 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. The Commission shall consult the Member States concerned during its assessment undertaken pursuant to Article 50(1).
Amendment 2281 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2
Article 51 – paragraph 2
2. In the report, the Commission shall state and explain whether the Member States concerned isare under migratory pressure.
Amendment 2285 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Where the Commission concludes that the Member States concerned isare under migratory pressure, the report shall identify:
Amendment 2288 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the capacity of the Member States under migratory pressure in the field of migration management, in particular asylum and return as well as, in particular in its overall needs in managing its asylum and returception caseload;
Amendment 2292 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point b – point i
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point b – point i
(i) measures that the Member States under migratory pressure should take in the field of migration management, and in particular in the field of asylum and returception;
Amendment 2294 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point b – point ii
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point b – point ii
(ii) measures referred to in Article 45(1), points (a), (b) andidentified by the Commission to support the Member States concerned, including: (a) capacity building measures in the field of asylum and reception, corresponding to the needs of the Member States under pressure; (cb) to be taken by other Member States; relocation of beneficiaries of international protection who have been granted protection less than two years prior to the relocation.
Amendment 2299 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point b – point iii
Article 51 – paragraph 3 – point b – point iii
Amendment 2314 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1
Article 52 – paragraph 1
1. Where the report referred to in Article 51 indicates that a Member State is under migratory pressure, the other Member States which are not themselves benefitting Member States shall contribute by means of the solidarity contributions referred to in Article 45(1), points (a), (b) and (c51(3) (b) (ii). Member States shall prioritise the relocation of unaccompanied minors.
Amendment 2329 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2332 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 52 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 2339 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 4
Article 52 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Commission considers that the solidarity contributions indicated in the Solidarity Response Plans do not correspond to the needs identified in the report on migratory pressure provided for in Article 51, it shall convene the Solidarity Forum. In such cases, the Commission shall invite Member States to adjust the type of contributions in their Solidarity Response Plans in the course of the Solidarity Forum by submitting revised Solidarity Response Plans.
Amendment 2356 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 1
Article 53 – paragraph 1
1. Within two weeks from the submission of the Solidarity Response Plans referred to in Article 52(3) or, where the Solidarity Forum is convened pursuant to Article 52(4), within two weeks from the end of the Solidarity Forum, the Commission shall adopt an implementing act laying down the solidarity contributions for the benefit of the Member States under migratory pressure to be taken by the other Member States and the timeframe for their implementation.
Amendment 2357 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2360 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 2363 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 53 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Where the measures proposed would lead to a shortfall greater than 30% of the total number of solidarity measures identified in the report on migratory pressure under Article 51(3)(b)(ii), the contributions set out in the implementing act shall be adjusted so that those Member States indicating such measures would be required to cover 50% of their share calculated according to the distribution key set out in Article 54 through measures set out in Article 51(3)(b)(ii). The CommissionCommission considers the measures proposed are inadequate, it shall adjust measures referred to in Article 51(3)(b)(iii) indicated by those Member States accordingly.
Amendment 2364 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) the total number of persons to be relocated from the requesting Member State pursuant to Article 45(1), points (a) or (c), taking into account the capacity and needs of the requesting Member States in the area of asylum identified in the report referred to inset of measures foreseen in Article 51 (3) (b) (ii) of this Regulation, including the total number of beneficiaries of international protection pursuant to Article 51 (3) (b) (ii) (b), that shall be relocated;
Amendment 2365 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point b
Amendment 2366 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 2367 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – point d
Amendment 2370 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 53 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 2373 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 4
Article 53 – paragraph 4
Amendment 2380 #
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 Articles 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 and 50 to 53 shall be based on the following criteria for each Member State, according to the latest available Eurostat data:
Amendment 2383 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the size of the population (540% weighting);
Amendment 2392 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the total GDP (540% weighting).
Amendment 2398 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 54 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) unemployment rate (20% weighting)
Amendment 2404 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 2430 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – title
Article 56 – title
Amendment 2432 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1
Article 56 – paragraph 1
Amendment 2436 #
2020/0279(COD)
2. Any Member State may, at any time, in response to a request for solidarity support by a Member State, or onsituations where there its own initiative, including in agreement with another Member State, make contributions by means of the measures referred to in Article 45 for the benefit of the Member State concerned and with its agreement. Contributions referred to in article 45, point (d) shall be in accordance with the objectives of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Asylum Migration Fund]no migratory pressure and where the mechanism established in Article 51 -53 is not applicable, decide to relocate beneficiaries of international protection. In this case it shall inform the Commission without delay.
Amendment 2446 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 2450 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) persons referred to in Article 45(1), point (b) where the period referred to in Article 55(2) has expired, and Article 45(2), point51(3) (b) (ii) (b).;
Amendment 2456 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 2
Article 57 – paragraph 2
2. Before applying the procedure set out in this Article, the benefitting Member State shall ensure that there are no reasonable grounds to consider the person concerned an individual and specific danger to national security or public order of that Member State, according to the procedure laid down in Article 14 (3). If there are reasonable grounds to consider the person a danger to national security or public order, the benefitting Member State shall not apply the procedure set out in this Article and shall, where applicable, exclude the person from the list referred to in Article 49(2)being relocated.
Amendment 2457 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3
Article 57 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2466 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 57 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where relocation is to be applied pursuant to Article 49,, the EU relocation coordinator should support the relocation activities from the benefitting Member Sstate shall use the list drawn up by the Asylum Agency and the European Border and Coast Guard Agencyto the contributing member state implementing their obligations referred to in Article 49(213a (d).
Amendment 2473 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Each Member State shall create a database of the requests of beneficiaries of international protection, who have been legally residing in its territory for less than two years and who have expressed their willingness to be relocated to another Member State. Each beneficiary of international protection may express up to two preferences for Member States to which he or she may be relocated. Each Member State shall regularly update the database referred to in this paragraph.
Amendment 2474 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. The Commission shall, by means of implementing act, lay down uniform criteria for the collection, retention and deletion by the Member States of the information referred to in paragraph 1, and the organizational and operational arrangements for the implementation of relocation;
Amendment 2475 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 3 c (new)
Article 57 – paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. When implementing the solidarity measures pursuant to Article 53(3), the benefitting Member State shall promptly inform of the activation of the relocation procedure, the beneficiaries of international protection registered in the database referred to in paragraph 1, on the basis of the chronological order of registration. Member States shall take into consideration the preferences expressed by the beneficiary of international protection. Potential beneficiaries of relocation shall express their consent to be relocated within 7 days after they have been informed, otherwise they shall be considered non-eligible for relocation. The benefitting Member State shall identify a number of beneficiaries corresponding to that established, by means of implementing act, by the Commission pursuant to Article 53.
Amendment 2477 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 2483 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 5
Article 57 – paragraph 5
5. The benefitting Member State shall transmit to the Member State of relocation as quickly as possible the relevant information and documents on the person referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3.
Amendment 2484 #
2020/0279(COD)
Amendment 2489 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 57 – paragraph 7
Article 57 – paragraph 7
Amendment 2512 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2
Article 58 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2518 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 58 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Member State of relocation shall indicate its responsibility in Eurodac pursuant to Article 11(1) and (3), respectively, of Regulation (EU) XXX/XXX [Eurodac Regulation].
Amendment 2520 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 3
Article 58 – paragraph 3
Amendment 2523 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 4
Article 58 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Member State of relocation has relocated a beneficiary for international protection, tThe Member State of relocation shall automatically grant international protection status respecting the respective status granted by the benefitting Member State.
Amendment 2529 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 5
Article 58 – paragraph 5
5. Where the Member State of relocation has relocated a third-country national who is illegalrregularly staying on its territory, of Directive 2008/115/EC shall apply.
Amendment 2531 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 59
Article 59
Amendment 2545 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 61 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The cost of relocation and transfer will be covered by the EU budget.
Amendment 2546 #
2020/0279(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 61 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 61 – paragraph 1 b (new)
The costs of reception of an applicant met by a determining Member State, from the time when the application for international protection was registered until the transfer of the applicant to the Member State responsible, or until the determining Member State assumes responsibility for the applicant, shall be refunded from the general budget of the Union.
Amendment 41 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the EAW is the foundation for establishing an area of freedom, security and justice; whereas its incorrect application could have devastatamaging effects on the functioning of the Schengen areapolice and judicial cooperation across the Union;
Amendment 44 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas a Union of equality that protects must ensure protection for all victims of crime12 while at the same protecting the rights of suspected and accused persons; _________________ 12EU Strategy on victims’ rights (2020- 25).
Amendment 45 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas most issues raised by the application of the EAW have been clarifiaddressed by the CJEU, such as ne bis in idem13 , judicial authority14 , primacy and EU harmonisation15 , independence of the judiciary16 , fundamental rights17 , double criminality18 and the extradition of EU citizens to third countries19 ; whereas, at the same time, judicial rulings cannot become a substitute for well-drafted legislation at Union level; _________________ 13 C-261/09, Mantello. 14C-453/16 PPU, Özçelik; C-452/16 PPU, Poltorak; C-477/16 PPU, Kovalkovas; Joined Cases C-508/18 and C-82/19 PPU, OG and PI. 15C-399/11, Melloni or C-42/17, M.A.S. and M.B. 16C-216/18 PPU, Minister for Justice and Equality. 17Joined Cases C-404/15 and C-659/15 PPU, Aranyosi and Căldăraru; C-128/18, Dorobantu. 18 C-289/15, Grundza. 19C-182/15, Petruhhin, judgment of 6 September 2016; C-191/16, Pisciotti, judgment of 10 April 2018; C-247/17 Raugevicius, judgment of 13 November 2018 and C-897/19 PPU, Ruska Federacija, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 2 April 2020, etc.
Amendment 59 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas other instruments have clarifiedhelped to address some EAW issues, such as Directive 2014/41/EU on the European Investigation Order21 and Regulation (EU) 1805/2018 on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders22 ; _________________ 21 OJ L 130, 1.5.2014, p. 1. 22 OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 75 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the EAW is a major achievement and an effective and indispensable instrument for combating serious cross-border crimes; states that the EAW has substantially improved cooperation on surrenders;
Amendment 83 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that such problems relate to prison conditions, proportionality, the execution of custodial sentences23 , time limits24 and in absentia decisions; acknowledges that certain cases raised the issue of double criminality25 ; points out that such problems not only undermine mutual trust between Member States but are also costly in social and economic terms to the individuals concerned, their families and societies in general; _________________ 23 CJEU, C-579/15, Popławski. 24 CJEU, C-168/13 PPU, Jeremy F. 25With guidance from C-289/15, Grundza, referring to Council Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA.
Amendment 88 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that some issues were solvedhave been addressed, in part, by a combination of soft law (EAW handbook), mutual assessments, the assistance of Eurojust, CJEU case law and supplementing legislation (Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA and Directive 2013/48/EU);
Amendment 100 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the EAW should not be misused for minor offences; urges the use of less intrusive legal instruments before an EAW is issued; points out that issuing authorities should carry out proportionality checks; calls on Member States and their judicial authorities to process EAW cases without undue delay once an EAW has been issued in order to keep pre-trial detention to a minimum;
Amendment 110 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that a double criminality check limits mutual recognition and, according to the CJEU, must be interpreted restrictively; emphasises, however, that there are ongoing concerns about the lack of a proper definition of criminal offences to which double criminality no longer applies; notes that mutual recognition should ideally work automatically27 ; _________________ 27See, for example, the Commission communication of 26 July 2000 on the Mutual Recognition of Final Decisions in Criminal Matters (COM(2000)0495).
Amendment 115 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. 10 a. Underlines that the principle of mutual recognition must be premised upon mutual trust which can be achieved only if respect for fundamental and procedural rights of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings are guaranteed throughout the Union;
Amendment 121 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to analyse common offences in the Member States and to assess the possibility of expandingwith a view to better defining when the EAW should be used and to facilitate proportionality assessments; further calls on the Commission to review the list of offences that do not require a double criminality check; highlights the importance of assessing the inclusion of additional offences such as particular environmental crimes (e.g. ship-source pollution offences), certain forms of tax evasion, hate crimes, sexual abuse, gender- based violence, offences committed through digital means such as identity theft, offenccrimes against public order and the constitutional integrity of the Member States, crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes;
Amendment 138 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the importance of defining more precisely the duties and competencies of the bodies involved in EAW procedures and ensuring that they are specialised and have practical experience; affirms that a broad margin of discretion for the executing authority is scarcely compatible with mutual recognition; considers thatbelieves that any review of the EAW Framework Decision must establish a procedure whereby an EAW can, if necessary, be validated in the issuing Member State by a judge, court, investigating magistrate or public prosecutor, in order to overcome the differing interpretations of the term "judicial authority"; considers that, if legal certainty can be provided regarding offences which clearly fall within the definition of double criminality, and those which do not then discretion should be limited in cases of double criminality;
Amendment 151 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Member States to provide flexibility forRegrets the lack of deadlines in the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA for the transmission of translated EAWs; calls on the Member States to apply common practices with regard to EAW language regimes;
Amendment 157 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to ensure adequate funding for Eurojust and EJN for facilitating and coordinating the EAW; notes that the Commission’s budgetary plans for Eurojust would have led to a stagnation in financing despite an increased workload; Reiterates its call for a specific EAW judicial network;
Amendment 169 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Calls for a regular review of non- executed EAWs and consideration of whether they, together with the corresponding SIS II and Interpol alerts, should be withdrawn; calls also for EAWs, and corresponding SIS II and Interpol alerts, to be withdrawn where the EAW has been refused on mandatory grounds such as on the ground of ne bis in idem;
Amendment 179 #
2019/2207(INI)
27. Notes that although Article 7(1) TEU can affect mutual recognHighlights the link between detention condition,s according to the CJEU, the executing authority must assess in each specific case whether there are substantial grounds for believing that, following the surrender, the person will run the risk of having their fundamental rights contravened; underlines that the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU does not amnd EAW measures and reminds Member States that Article3 of the ECHR and the relevant case-law impose on the Member States not only negative obligations, by banning them from subjecting prisoners to inhuman and degrading treatment, but also positive obligations, by requiring them to ensure that prison conditions are consistent with human dignity, and that thorough, effective investigations are carried ount to automatic non-recognitionif such rights are violated;
Amendment 188 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Reiterates the importanceits call for a legislative proposal ofn an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, in the form ofunderpinned by an interinstitutional agreement consisting of an annual independent and evidence-based review to assess the compliance of all EU Member States with Article 2 TEU, plus country-specific recommendations and budgetary conditionality once in place;
Amendment 198 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls onRequests the Commission to provide an assessment of ne bis in idem and possible legislative action; submit a legislative proposal to revise the EAW and provide for, inter alia: - a proportionality check when issuing an EAW, based on all the relevant factors and circumstances such as the seriousness of the offence, whether the case is trial-ready, the impacts on the rights of the requested person, the cost implications and the availability of an appropriate less intrusive alternative measure; - a standardised consultation procedure whereby the competent authorities in the issuing and executing Member State can exchange information regarding the execution of EAW, in particular with regard to proportionality and trial- readiness; - a mandatory refusal ground where there are substantial grounds to believe that the execution of the EAW would be incompatible with the executing Member State's obligation in accordance with Article 6 TEU and the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 233 #
2019/2207(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Calls on the Commission to continue negotiations with the UK in order to find the best solution that guarantees effective cooperation in criminal matters; without lowering or undermining EU standards in respect of the procedural and fundamental rights of suspects and accused persons.
Amendment 1 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
— having regard to Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, and 18, 19 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 7 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4
Citation 4
— having regard to Articles 2, 3, 5, 8 and 813 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR),
Amendment 10 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 12
Citation 12
— having regard to the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights related to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, and in particular Sharifi v. Austria of 5 December 2013 (Chamber judgment), Mohammadi v. Austria of 3 July 2014 (Chamber judgment), Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece of 21 October 2014 (Chamber judgment), and Tarakhel v. Switzerland of 4 November 2014 (Grand Chamber judgment), and ECtHR - M.S.S. v Belgium and Greece [GC]; Application No. 30696/09, Judgement of 21 November 2011, related to Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 (Dublin II)
Amendment 13 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 27 a (new)
Citation 27 a (new)
— having regard to the European Parliament Resolution of 12 April 2016 on the situation in the Mediterranean and the need for a holistic EU approach to Migration (2015/2095(INI));
Amendment 14 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 27 b (new)
Citation 27 b (new)
— having regard to the ECJ judgement of the 2 April 2020 on the joined cases C-715/17, C-718/17 and C- 719/17 Commission v Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic;
Amendment 20 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas 2.5 million people applied for asylum in the European Union in the period 2015-2016, a fourfold increase compared to 2012-2013714,200 asylum applications were lodged in the EU in 2019;
Amendment 41 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas in the case of most asylum applications, the set of hierarchical criteria and the deadlines laid down as part of Dublin procedures are not met and transfers are not carried out;
Amendment 43 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas studies on the implementation of the Dublin III Regulation highlight systematic disregard towards family provisions and incorrect application of the principle of the best interest of the child, which have resulted in unnecessary and unreasonable transfer procedures;
Amendment 46 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the provisions on dependent persons (article 16) and the discretionary clauses (article 17) could be widely used to support family unity;
Amendment 48 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Amendment 51 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas the preventive action provision of the Dublin III Regulation (Article 33) has never been used;
Amendment 53 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C e (new)
Recital C e (new)
Amendment 55 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C f (new)
Recital C f (new)
Cf. whereas implementation of the Dublin III Regulation does not effectively address secondary movements which are largely due to asylum seekers' social- connections with specific countries, protection-based concerns, health reasons and systemic deficiencies in the asylum systems where application are made;
Amendment 56 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C g (new)
Recital C g (new)
Cg. whereas Article 28 of the Dublin Regulation allows detention as an exceptional measure "to secure transfer procedures", where there is "significant risk of absconding" of the applicant; whereas this definition remains unclear and the interpretation varies from a Member State to another;
Amendment 59 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C h (new)
Recital C h (new)
Ch. whereas the use of detention and coercive transfers raises concerns with respect to asylum seekers' right to liberty, dignity and physical integrity;
Amendment 62 #
2019/2206(INI)
Da. whereas some of the flaws are inherent in the design of the Regulation and cannot be solved through better implementation alone;
Amendment 78 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Incorporating the principle of solidarity into the management of asylum seekersDublin Regulation
Amendment 79 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 98 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Considers that the Dublin System, and in particular the first country of irregular entry criterion places a significant burden on a minority of Member states;
Amendment 99 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Urges the EU to establish an automatic, permanent and mandatory relocation mechanism ensuring the full respect of the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility enshrined in art.80 of TFEU; including for those rescued at sea;
Amendment 109 #
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 levelCommon European and Asylum System; deplores the fact that efforts to overhaul the Dublin III Regulation have been blocked in the Council;
Amendment 117 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the crisis management tool provided for in Article 33 did not provide effective support to the Member States, nor did it offer a response to the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis; considers that a solidarity-based crisis management mechanism, endowed with a financial instrument managed by the Commission,mechanism for early warning, preparedness and crisis management as set out in Article 33 has not been applied to date, considers that a solidarity-based mechanism in the EU should be established to ensure continuity of the right of asylum in the EU uander the best possible conditions not to hinder arrivals and deflect responsibility; emphasizes that the protection of fundamental rights of asylum applicants should always remain at the centre of this mechanism; also notes that the provisions set out in the Temporary Protection Directive has yet to be invoked;
Amendment 124 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that such a mechanism should allow for the participation of civil society organization providing professional assistance to people in need of international protection during the assessment of their asylum application, particularly of legal nature;
Amendment 130 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Member States to makexpand the use of the discretionary clause in Article 17 when exceptional, to address challenging situations and humanitarian circumstances so warrant,, as for example to relocate and provide decent reception conditions to asylum seekers currently living in the Greek hotspots in an atmosphere of extreme tension and to provide decent receptioninhumane, degrading, unsanitary and unsafe conditions;
Amendment 134 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Takes the view that provisions on family unity, which are the first in the hierarchy of criteria, should be efficiently implemented, and that provisions on dependent persons (article 16) and the discretionary clauses (article 17) should be used more widely to support family unity;
Amendment 136 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. In the absence of a permanent solidarity mechanism, supports the expanded use of discretionary clauses of Article 17 as a solidarity tool for responsibility sharing in particular in situations of large number of spontaneous arrivals and in the specific context of sea arrivals and disembarkation procedures;
Amendment 140 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 155 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights the significant operational backing for Dublin proceduresand technical support provided by the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) in the hotspotto Member States; 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 conductedand the Commission to increase assistance to Member States, especially those at the border of the EU; calls for the establishment of a European Asylum Agency, with sufficient financial and human resources, supporting Member States with Dublin procedures;
Amendment 159 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Calls on the Commission to monitor that interviews are conducted in the language of the asylum seeker or in a language that the applicant is reasonably supposed to understand;
Amendment 161 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. PDeplores that the rights of asylum seekers, including that to legal assistance, are often neglected when implementing the Dublin III Regulation, points out that the protection of fundamental rights must be at the heart of the measures taken to implementEU asylum policies and of the implementation process of the Dublin III Regulation, including the protection of childrenminors, victims of trafficking, victims of torture, and the most vulnerable;
Amendment 169 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recalls that asylum seekers have the right to be fully informed on the procedures; regrets that the level of information provided to asylum seekers differs consistently from one Member state to another; urges the Member states to guarantee that minors have tailored, child-friendly information and specific support; stresses that providing legal assistance and interpretation are key to ensure applicants' right to information;
Amendment 174 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Points out that transfers of asylum seekers, and in particular vulnerable people, minors and families can result in violations of their human rights; urges Member states to properly assess the risks to which applicants would be exposed in the Member States of destination; stresses in particular that transfers must be carried out in a way that under no circumstances exposes individuals to a risk of refoulement, irrespective of whether the asylum system of return is affected by systemic deficiencies;
Amendment 180 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to monitor compliance with the hierarchy of criteria more closely; regards it as essential to clarify the conditions for applying the family reunification criterion and toenable a better use of the family provisions, including by harmoniseing the standards of proof required; callacross Member states oin the Member States and the Commission to protect the best interests of children and to clarify the criteria for keeping children in detentiondirection of less stringent and more achievable standards; calls the Commission and the Member states to speed up family reunification procedures including through an immediate transfer to a country in which the applicant has family;
Amendment 188 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Regrets that Member states do not proactively contribute to the identification and verification of the family links; deplores that the burden of proof is almost entirely left to the applicants;
Amendment 192 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to ensure an adequate verification of the best interest of the child, avoiding that the complexity of the procedures results in the failure to implement this principle, in particular for the unaccompanied minors of age between 16 and 18;
Amendment 193 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Regrets that Member states apply different interpretation of the best interest of the child; calls therefore the Commission to clarify the definition in line with EU legislation and to identify which family reunification possibilities, security and safety considerations, background information should be taken into consideration;
Amendment 194 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8e. Urges the Member States and the Commission to clarify that detention is never in the best interest of the child and that a minor should never be detained because of the migratory status of their family; calls to expand the sources used for the monitoring and identification of unlawful practices to include information provided by international and non- governmental organizations where it is reliable, up-to-date and specific;
Amendment 206 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses that the number of transfer procedures has increased significantly, generating considerable human, material and financial costs; deplores, however, the fact that in only 11% of cases are transfers actually carried out, a further factor in the permanent overloading of asylum systems; stresses the lack of cooperation and information-sharing between Member States; regards efforts to combat secencourages Member states to apply the discretiondary movements as essential in order to reduce the number of transfer requests; proposes thatclause more swiftly in cases where it becomes evident that transfers cannot be carried out, or where the coinditions which trigger transfer procedures be clarified and harmonisedvidual situation of the applicant requires so;
Amendment 219 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that in some cases the rules on transfer of responsibility under Dublin III undermine the efficiency of asylum procedures and the carrying-out of transfers and, according to the evidence, that in many cases asylum seekers remain outside of the system due to disproportionate use of the criterion of the first countribute to the increase in the number of secondary movements by encouraging asylum-seekers to remain outside the systemy of irregular entry and the insufficient consideration of the meaningful links and the particular needs of the applicants; 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 anincrease trust between Member States and between them and the asylum seeker absconds;
Amendment 228 #
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 would enhance rights-compliant procedures, simplify Dublin procedures 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;
Amendment 232 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Member States to increase the resources necessary to make Dublin III operational, particularly the number of asylum officers; calls on the European Commission to increase the funds available for the provision of legal assistance, especially funding for civil society professionals offering legal assistance to people in need of international protection during the Dublin procedure;
Amendment 235 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
A singlerights-centred asylum application in the EU
Amendment 239 #
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; considernotes 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 datare are multiple reasons for submission of additional asylum applications;
Amendment 249 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the rate of protection for asylum seekers varies greatly between Member States for certain nationalities; considers that a common list of safe countries and a shared country-risk analysis, or at least greater convergence, would reduce these disparities, and thus also the number of secondary movements; stresses that the return of persons not eligible for asylum is a prerequisite for the effectiveness of the Dublin III Regulation and this can contribute to onward movement; considers that accounting for individual needs of the applicant in the Dublin procedures would reduce secondary movements; calls for the inclusion of a relocation criteria considering the "genuine links" with a particular Member state as an efficient approach to reduce secondary movements;
Amendment 261 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 282 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission and the Council to work towards convergence in the bilateral agreements concluded between Member States and with thirdimplementation of the Dublin III Regulation by taking stock of the elements countries, in order to optimise implementation of the Dublin III Regubuting to greater efficiency, and compliance with human rights legislation;
Amendment 286 #
2019/2206(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Urges the Council to find a sustainable solution and take the necessary steps to adopt a position on the Dublin Recast Regulation by qualified majority;
Amendment 44 #
2019/2028(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Regrets that the Commission did not follow the budgetary request of Europol and proposed to underfund the Agency by 30 million euros in 2020; notes that the decrease of the eu-LISA commitment appropriations by 18,7 % (-55 million euros) corresponds to the end of the development of the Entry Exit System; reiterates the need to ensure adequate financial support for JHA Agencies to deliver the tasks assigned to them in full transparency and to fight against cross- border serious crime in full compliance with fundamental rights; moreover, requests adequate financial resources to equip all relevant agencies with adequate funds to cover their operational and administrative tasks in order to help secure network and information systems;