21 Amendments of Alin MITUȚA related to 2020/2167(DEC)
Amendment 4 #
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants/Refuses to grant the Executive Director of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2019;
Amendment 5 #
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019 / Points out that a proposal to close the accounts of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019 must be submitted at a subsequent part-session;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that on 28 April 2021 Parliament decided to postpone the decision on the 2019 discharge of the European Border and Coastguard Agency (the ‘Agency’); calls on the Agency to regularly report to the discharge authority on the actions taken towards and the timeline of the implementation of recommendations made in the postponement decision resolution; calls on the Agency to present this roadmap on a quarterly basis, at the request of the discharge authority;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Notes that the Agency has prepared an initial Business Continuity Policy and that at the moment of the Agency's reply, the policy was undergoing final fine-tuning with the aim to be adopted by the end of Q2 2021; calls on the Agency to report back to the discharge authority about the state of implementation of its Business Continuity Plan;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Welcomes the Agency's ongoing efforts to create a register of all documents that the Agency produces, in line with its transformation and digitalisation; welcomes that the Agency proactively published key documents on its website, making them available through the Public Access to Documents register; calls on the Agency to continue to improve public access to documents and to refrain from seeking to recover the costs of external lawyers from applicants in court cases based on access to information requests in the future;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the finding of the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’) regarding financing agreements that reimbursements were still based on actual costs instead of on unit costs, and the associated issues identified with supporting evidence; recalls that this issue was also identified in the discharge for 2018; notwelcomes from the Agency’s follow- up report that the Agency has piloted the unit cost approach for heavy equipment and an analysis was made on the use of unit costs for the deployment of human resources and light technical equipment; notes that the pilot projects for heavy equipment revealed that the unit cost approach would increase the total costs, as the financial consequences of unpredictable events such as weather conditions, repairs and days needed for transfer of the asset, that are now reimbursable on the basis of presented evidence, would need to be factored into the unit cost; calls on the Court the examine the unit cost approach piloted by the Agency and to regularly inform the discharge authority if this approach is indeed not suited for heavy equipmentabout the results obtained;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates its call on the Agency to review its mechanisms concerning the construction payments and to ensure compliance with the principles of sound financial management; welcomes, from the Agency's reply, that a prevention mechanism of such payments has been implemented throughout the financial circuit; welcomes that financial verifiers have been instructed to reject such pre- financing payments and advised the authorising officers to reject them as well;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes with concern the Court’s Special Report 08/2021 entitled ‘Frontex’s support to external border management: not sufficiently effective to date’; notesis concerned about the Court’s conclusion that the Agency’s support to Member States and Schengen associated countries in fighting against illegal immigration and cross-border crime is not sufficiently effective and that the Agency has not fully implemented its mandate under Regulation (EU) 2016/16243 ; notes further that the Court highlighted risks related to the Agency’s mandate under Regulation (EU) 2019/18964 ; _________________ 3 Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2016 on the European Border and Coast Guard and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 and Council Decision 2005/267/EC (OJ L 251, 16.9.2016, p. 1). 4Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624 (OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes with concern the Court’s conclusion that although a functional information exchange framework is in place to support the fight against illegal immigration, it did not function well enough to provide accurate, complete and up-to-date situational awareness of the Union’s external borders; notes that the Agency dispatches timely and relevant migration information about the situation at the external borders and provides information about specific events; notes, however, some drawbacks as far as external border control is concerned, such as the lack of information, technical standards for border control equipment, a common catalogue for cross-border crime reporting, and near- real-time information about the situation at the Union’s air borders, and delays in updating the common integrated risk analysis model;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the Commission and the Agency accepted or partially accepted, all recommendations of the Court and calls on the budgetary authority to look into the possibility to put a part of the Agency’s future budget appropriations in a reserve that can be made available when milestones in the implementation of the Court’s recommendations are met; calls on the Agency to comprehensively and timely address and implement the Court's recommendations and report to the discharge authority about the progress in the implementation of these recommendations;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recalls the concerns of Parliament on the meetings conducted in 2018 and 2019 by the Agency with representatives of industries relevant for the Agency’s work, with a majority of representatives not listed in the Union transparency register; points to Article 118 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 that requires the Agency to ensure transparency as regards lobbying by means of a transparency register and by disclosing all meetings with third-party stakeholders; notwelcomes the decision of the Agency’s executive director on the transparency register of the Agency of 5 May 2021; calls on the Agency to regularly report to the discharge authority about the implementation and use of this tool;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls the establishment of the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group by Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs; notes that the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group published its report on the fact-finding investigation on Frontex concerning alleged fundamental rights violations on 14 July 2021; notes that the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group found no proof of the Agency’s involvement in alleged illegal pushbacks; notes however that the FSWG concluded that the Agency had been aware of cases of fundamental rights violations, but failed to address and investigate these violations promptly, vigilantly and effectively;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Notes the division of responsibilities between the Agency and Member States in relation to fundamental rights; recalls that the principle of working under instructions of the host Member States hinders the capacity of the Agency to fulfil its fundamental rights obligations; acknowledges the limits which are experienced by the Agency in practice to only investigate fundamental rights compliance in relation to assets financed or co-financed by the Agency; recalls the recommendations of the FSWG and urges the Executive Director to ensure that the Fundamental Rights Officer is consulted prior to the decision to launch a Joint Operation; calls on the Agency's management and on the relevant national authorities to further develop a structure and culture of cooperation, ensuring compliance and full respect of national, Union and international law provisions on fundamental rights;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13 c. European Ombudsman investigation
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 d (new)
Paragraph 13 d (new)
13 d. Welcomes the conclusions of the European Ombudsman OI/5/2020/MHZ strategic inquiry concerning the Agency's complaints mechanism for alleged breaches of fundamental rights, revealing that there was no maladministration in the Agency; acknowledges the Agency's commitment to address the areas for which the European Ombudsman identified improvement suggestions;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Is concerned about the findings of the FSWG that that the Fundamental Rights Officer (FRO) and the Consultative Forum (CF) were frequently not involved from the start in the development of rules, procedures and strategies on matters concerning fundamental rights as well as about the fact that the opinions and recommendations of the FRO and CF were not sufficiently taken into account by the Management Board and the Executive Director; calls on the Agency to fully and actively include the FRO and CF in all relevant processes from the very start; calls on the Executive Director to revise his relationship with the FRO and CF, timely taking into consideration all their recommendations; urges the Agency to fully implement the recommendations of the FSWG and to report to the discharge authority about the progress achieved;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6 a (new)
Subheading 6 a (new)
Management
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6 b (new)
Subheading 6 b (new)
Reiterates with concern the findings of the FSWG that the Executive Director has delayed the recruitment of the three Deputy Executive Directors, and has refrained from delegating independent powers to them, while expanding the cabinet of the Executive Director to 63 staff members;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6 c (new)
Subheading 6 c (new)
Acknowledges that the competencies of the three Deputy Executive Directors were defined by the Management Board and respective vacancy notices for the three positions were published in the Official Journal of the European Union on March 24th, 2021; calls on the Agency to report to the discharge authority on the progress obtained with respect to the recruitment process;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the Agency’s fundamental rights officer took office on 1 June 2021; notregrets the prolonged delay that has affected this procedure; welcomes the statements of the Agency’s executive director that the recruitment of a first batch of 20 fundamental rights monitors is completed, with the fundamental rights monitors starting their training from 1 June 2021, and that the appointment of a second batch of 20 fundamental rights monitors is ongoing; further notes the statement that of those 20 fundamental right monitors, five have been appointed at AD level and fifteen at AST level; reiterates that Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 provides for the recruitment of at least 40 fundamental rights monitors and insists that the Agency swiftly appoints the remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors; notes the Agency’s statement that those remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors will be recruited from an established AD 7 reserve list, once additional AD7 posts have been allocated to the Agency; calls on the Agency to take all necessary measures to ensure that all fundamental rights monitors are timely recruited, at the required AD level;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Refers, for other observations of a cross-cutting nature accompanying its decision on discharge, to its resolution of 29 April 20216 on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.; calls on the Agency to periodically to present and report to the discharge authority the state of implementation of a roadmap addressing the issues identified in the decision of 28 April 2021 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019; _________________ 6 Texts adopted, P9_TA (2021)0215.