9 Amendments of Jana HYBÁŠKOVÁ related to 2008/2031(INI)
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Believes that the arms embargo imposed on China is an illustration of EU incoherence and inconsistency, given that this embargo was originally established following the 1989 Tiananmen massacre and that, at present, the EU has no specific strategy or demands relating to Tiananmen, when sanctions are reviewed, and the EU has not received to date any explanations about that massacre, and there is therefore no reason for lifting this embargo;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls for action to improve the application of the EU's targeted financial sanctions, in order to ensure that, in practice, the measures comprehensively deny designated persons and entities access to all financial services within the EU's jurisdiction, including those that pass through EU clearing-house banks or otherwise make use of financial services within the EU's jurisdiction; stresses the need for greater flexibility in the distribution of sanction lists within the EU and within Member States to all persons covered by the obligations laid down in the Third Money Laundering Directive; proposes that each Member State designates one institution responsible for disseminating this information;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. NotesTakes account of the fact that both the autonomous EU anti-terrorist sanctions and the EU implementation of Security Council anti- terrorist sanctions are the subject of several cases before the Court of First Instance and the Court of Justice;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Recalls the obligation of EU Member States to draft sanctions in compliance with Article 6(2) of the Treaty on European Union, which requires the Union to respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States; stresses that the present blacklisting procedures at both the EU and the UN levels are deficient from the perspective of legal security and legal remedies; urges the Council to draw all the necessary conclusions and fully to apply the final judgments of the ECJ as regards EU autonomous sanctions;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Calls on the Council and the Commission to reviewsupport the existing procedure for blacklisting and delisting, in order to respect blacklisted individuals’ and entities’the procedural and substantive human rights and notably international standards as regards the obtaining of an effective remedy before an independent and impartial body and due process, including the right to be notified and adequately informed of the charges brought against the individual or entity in question and of the decisions taken and the right to compensation for any violation of human rightsof EU citizens, especially the right to life, liberty and security of person; calls, similarly, on the EU Member States to promote such a review within the UN mechanisms in order to ensure respect for fundamental rights when applying targeted sanctions in the fight against terrorism;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47
Paragraph 47
47. Considers that Article 75 of the TFEU would be an opportunity to be seized by the European Parliament in order to remedy the shortcomings in current practice as regards the inclusion of names on a black list and support all the current parliamentary work aimed at being included on the agenda for the 2009 legislative programme;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Deeply regrets that none of the judicial bodies is in position to assess the appropriateness of blacklisting, given that the evidence leading to blacklisting is based purely on information held by the secret serviNotes that the evidence leading to blacklisting is based primarily on information held by the secret services; points to the non-existence of sufficient democratic control recording the subjects of terrorist lists and stresses the need for them to be introducesd; calls in this regard on EU Member States to allow an effective parliamentary control over the work of the secret services;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59