11 Amendments of Aldo PATRICIELLO related to 2014/2253(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that in the area of justice there were 61 infringement cases open in 2012 and 67 in 2013; points out that most of these cases concerned citizenship and free movement of persons; strongly deplores the fact that most of the late infringement cases were launched due to the late transposition of Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings; expresses concern over the significant increase in the number of complaints in the justice area in 2013;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the significant and decisive progress that has been made over the past years in strengthening the rights of defence of suspected or accused persons in the EU; underlines the crucial importance of the timely, complete and correct transposition of all measures stipulated in the Council’s Roadmap for strengthening procedural rights of suspected or accused persons in criminal proceedings; points out that these measures are crucial to the proper functioning of EU judicial cooperation in criminal matters;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that in a European Union founded on the rule of law and on the certainty and predictability of laws, EU citizens must be the first to be made aware in a clear, transparent and timely manner (including via the internetby the internet and other means) whether and which national laws have been adopted in transposition of EU laws, and which national authorities are responsible for ensuring they are correctly implemented;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that not only in the AFSJ but also in the other policy areas, there is a need to develop and enhance the access of citizens to information with regard to the implementation of EU law; calls on the Commission to identify the best possible ways to achieve this, to make use of the existing communication tools in order to enhance transparency, and to ensure proper access to information on the implementation of EU law;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that, as regards cases of bad application of EU law, the Commission mainly reliesrelies to a large extent on complaints; deplores the fact that individual complaints are often treated with considerable delays; encourages the Commission to address cases of strategic importance;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Emphasises that the EU has been set up as a Unionn entity based on the rule of law and respect of human rights (Article 2 TEU), reiterates that careful monitoring of Member States’ and EU institutions’ acts and omissions is of utmost importance, and expresses its concern at the number of petitions to Parliament and complaints to the Commission concerning problems supposedly resolved by the Commission;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recognises that the primary responsibility for the correct implementation and application of EU law lies with Member States, but points outstresses that this does not absolve EU institutions of their duty to respect primary EU law when they produce secondary EU law, or decide, implement and impose on Member States social, economic or other policies;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes, therefore, with regret that the Council, the Commission and the ECB do not always themselves respect the Treaties, nor do they assist Member States with the correct implementation of EU law, thus by their practice severely undermining popular support for the EU and belieffaith in its legitimacyinstitutions;