BETA

13 Amendments of Kinga GÁL related to 2013/2109(INL)

Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas all existing mutual recognition instruments in the field of criminal justice complement each other, therefore that very instrument should be used, which can lead to the best result; and whereas both the issuing and executing authorities have the duty to cooperate and to find the best solution to a case;
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C – point iii
(iii) the lack of regular review of the Schengen Information System (SIS) and Interpol alerts as well as the lack of an automatic link between the withdrawal of a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and the removal of such alerts, and uncertainty as to the effect of a refusal to execute an EAW on the continued validity of an EAW and the linked alerts with the result that persons subject to refused EAWs are unable to move freely within the area of freedom, security and justice for fear of future arrest and surrender;
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Keeping in mind the new legal framework from 2014 under the Lisbon Treaty, considers that this report should not deal with problems arising directly from the incorrect implementation of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA since it is more appropriate that such problems are remedied by way of enforcement proceedings brought by the Commission; underlining that many of the occurred problems can be solved through better and correct implementation of the Framework Decision;
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Therefore requSuggests that the Commission to submitinitiates, on the basis of Article 82 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, legislative proposals following the detailed recommendations set out in the Annex hereto and providing for:
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point a
(a) a mandatory refusal ground based on the infringement or risk of infringement of human rights applicable to mutual recognition instruments; in the same time calls on Member States to explore all the existing possibilities in the current Framework Decision (e.g. Article 12 of the Preamble) in order to better safeguard the protection of fundamental rights of citizens;
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point d
(d) a procedure whereby a mutual recognition measure can, if necessary, be validated in the issuing State by a judge, court, investigating magistrate or public prosecutor, in order to overcome the differing interpretations of the term ‘judicial authority’;deleted
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 – point e
(e) consistent legal remedies to secure the right to an effective legal remedy in compliance with Article 47(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, bearing in mind that all mutual recognition instruments are in need to secure the right to an effective remedy in compliance with Article 47(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, thus a horizontal approach is welcomed;
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on Member States and the Commission to cooperate in strengthening contact networks of judges, prosecutors and criminal defence lawyers to facilitate effective and well-informed EAW proceedings, and to offer relevant training at national and European level to judicial and legal practitioners including defence lawyers acting in such proceedings. on the adequate use of the EAW, as well as on the combined use of the different mutual recognition instruments;
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Commission to provide adequate funding to bodies such as the Eurojust and European Judicial Training Network, to the potential European Arrest Warrant Judicial Network and to a network of defenc which can provide support to the lawyers working on European criminal justice and extradition matters.;
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 4 - title
Validation procedure for Union mutual legal recognition instruments:deleted
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 4 - indent 1
- “issuing authority” in Union criminal legislation shall be defined as:deleted
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 4 - indent 1 – point i)
(i) a judge, a court, an investigating magistrate or a public prosecutor competent in the case concerned; ordeleted
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex – recommendation 4 - indent 1 – point ii)
(ii) any other competent authority as defined by the issuing State, provided that the act to be executed is validated, after examination of its conformity with the conditions for issuing the instrument, by a judge, court, investigating magistrate or a public prosecutor in the issuing State.deleted
2013/12/23
Committee: LIBE