24 Amendments of Elena YONCHEVA related to 2021/2180(INI)
Amendment 4 #
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 22 #
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 89 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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;