6 Amendments of Margrete AUKEN related to 2015/2326(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Appreciates the importance attributed in the report to petitions submitted by citizens, businesses and civil society organisations as an important means of monitoring the application of EU law and identifying possible loopholes in it through citizens’ direct expression of their views, and experiences, a fundamental right enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty and an important element of European citizenship;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges the administrative guarantees granted to complainants, such as the timely provision of information, and notification, in respect of their complaints, as also requested by the Committee on Petitions in its 2015 opinion on the aforementioned report; stresses that the quality in its treatment on a case-by-case basis should not in any case be undermined by a higher volume of petitions received;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Considers that the assessment of cases of possible breach of EU legislation, and in particular those emerging from petitions, should not only be done merely on procedural grounds, but taking into account the substantial elements and the ultimate spirit of the related EU legislation applicable;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Regrets that petitions submitted by EU citizens still refer to violations of EU law; considers that these petitions attest to the fact that there are still frequent and widespread instances of late or incomplete transposition, or of misapplication, of EU law, and stresses that the Member States should implement and execute EU law effectively; suggests incorporating more effectively preventive mechanisms, such as injunction procedures, particularly when it comes to cases such infrastructure projects where the possibility of a breach of EU environmental law is envisaged;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that the area of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (previously known as the ‘third pillar’) is frequently addressed in petitions by natural persons; welcomes, therefore, the expansion of the Commission’s competences to include police and judicial cooperation as of 1 December 2014notes that persisting shortcomings such as long delays in national court proceedings concerning matters involving EU law are often identified in the treatment of several petitions; underlines the usefulness and appropriateness of preliminary rulings by the ECJ as guidance for these cases and regrets the scarce use of such a provision by national courts; welcomes, therefore, the expansion of the Commission’s competences to include police and judicial cooperation as of 1 December 2014; reminds that the examination and treatment of petitions is independent and of a different nature than national judiciary procedures, and that these are likely to run in parallel without mutual interference;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the importance of implementation plans adopted by the Commission with the aim of assisting and guiding Member States in the timely, clear and correct transposition of EU directives; welcomes the importance attributed to Better Regulation and to the monitoring of EU regulatory fitness, which form part of a greater effort to improve the quality of EU legislation and – it is to be hoped – should have a positive impact on the number of petitions submitted.