Activities of Renate SOMMER related to 2013/2155(INI)
Plenary speeches (2)
Public access to documents 2011-2013 (short presentation)
Public access to documents 2011-2013 (short presentation)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on public access to documents (Rule 104(7)) for the years 2011-2013 PDF (207 KB) DOC (102 KB)
Amendments (35)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas it is a general rule that access to legislative documents should be fully provided, while exceptions regarding non- legislative documents should be narrowedthe EU's decision-making mechanisms and legislation need to be more transparent;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas secrecy and discretion belong to an era when Europe was built by diplomats and civil servants; whereas transparency is essential to a democratic political union of citizens in which they can fully participate in the democratic process; whereas transparent administration benefits the interests of citizens, the fight against corruption and the legitimacy of the Union’s political system and legislation;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the rejection of the ACTA agreement has shown that secrecy does not actually protect negotiations, but that, rather, it harmpublic should be informed about negotiations on international agreements twhem through the lack of democratic lre this will not be detrimental to the negiotimacy that accompanies itations;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas citizens are clamouring for more transparency, including from EU institutions, as exemplified by recent initiatives such as Wikileaks, LobbyPlag, VoteWatch and other revelations made by whistleblowersbroad public access to documents is a key element of a lively democracy;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas in a healthy democracy citizens should not have to rely on whistleblowers in order to ensure transparency of their governments’ competences and activitiecitizens must be guaranteed broad access to documents;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the EU legislation on access to documents is still not being properly applied by the Union’s administration; whereas the exceptions of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 are being applied routinely rather than of exceptionally by those administrationsgreater efforts should be made to implement EU legislation on access to documents; whereas the exceptions of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should be defined more precisely;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas litigation entails extremelyto challenge a decision is an option available to everyone but can entail lengthy processes, the risk of high, even prohibitive costs, and an uncertain outcome, puttosing an unreasonable burden on citizens who wish to challenge a decision to refuse (partial) access; whereas this means in practice that there is no effective legal remedy against a negative decision on a request for access to documents;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas faster, less cumbersome and more accessible procedures for handling complaints against refusals to grant access are urgently needed, so as to reduce the need for litigation and create a true culture of transparency;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital V
Recital V
V. whereas athe number of applications for access to documents have resulteding in cases being lodged with the General Court or taken on appeal to the Court of Justice is falling (Commission: from 15 cases and 3 appeals in 2011 to 14 cases and 1 appeal in 2012; Council: from 1 case and 2 appeals in 2011 to 1 appeal in 20128; Parliament: none in 2011 or 2012); __________________ 8 Council v In 't Veld (intervention by European Parliament in support of In ‘t Veld).
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AA
Recital AA
AA. whereas the institutions have failed to implement Articles 15(2) and 15(3), subparagraph 5 of the TFEU, regarding the obligation for the European Parliament and the Council to meet in public when considering a draft legislative act, and to publish the documents relating to the legislative procedures under the terms laid down by the regulations referred to in Article 15(3), subparagraph 2access to documents should not be placed on the same footing as access to procedures;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AD
Recital AD
AD. whereas international agreements have binding effects and impact on EU legislation; whereas negotiation documents should be public in principle, without prejudice to legitimate exceptions; whereas the application of the exception for the protection of international relations applies as stated in paragraph 19 of In ‘t Veld v Council (T-529/09)the public should be informed about such agreements;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AE
Recital AE
AE. whereas informal trilogues between the Commission, Parliament and the Council are defining for the formation of EU legislation; whereas trilogues are not public and documents regarding informal trilogues, including agendas and summery reports, are not made available to the public by defaultin order to avoid any outside influence on the legislative process at this decisive stage;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AE a (new)
Recital AE a (new)
AEa. whereas the legislative decision- making process is very complex, with many preparatory, confidential and secret documents which are vital for the whole legislative process;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AG
Recital AG
AG. whereas the negotiations on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 have been in deadlock owing to the incompatible positions taken; whereas the new instrument will need to provide for significantly moreat least the same level of transparency thanas the status quo;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AI
Recital AI
AI. whereas the classification of documents into levels of confidentiality falling under the scope of the 2010 Framework Agreement on relations between Parliament and the Commission, or as ‘sensitive documents’ under Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, should be made on the basis of careful and specific consideration; whereas overclassification leads to unnecessary and disproportionate secrecy of documents and to meetings being held in camera without proper justification;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AJ
Recital AJ
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital AK
Recital AK
AK. whereas the Court of Justice has ruled in Case C-536/11, paragraph 43 that ‘any request for access to the [cartel file] must be assessed on a case-by-case basis [by the national courts], taking into account all the relevant factors of the case’; whereas it is recommended that EU guidelines be drawn up as a helpful tool for judges; whereas such guidelines need to distinguish between company documents and cartel files held by the Commission;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the institutions, bodies and agencies to strictly apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, taking full account of the body of case-law relating thereto;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the administrations to provide fullan indication of allthose documents falling within the scope of a request for access to documents under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, following the initial application;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Council to move forward withfor progress to be made on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; calls on the Council and Parliament to agree on a new instrument that provides significantly more transparency, including the effective implementation of Article 15 TFEU;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on all the institutions to evaluate and, where necessary, review their internal arrangements for reporting wrongdoing, and calls for the protection of whistleblowers;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the EU institutions, bodies and agencies to harmonise their Annual Reports on access to documents, and to present similar statistics, in a compatible form and to the fullest and most inclusive extent possible (e.g. in tables in the Annex which allow for direct comparison);
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the EU institutions, bodies and agencies to adopt the recommendations put forward by Parliamentake account of Parliament's recommendations set out in its previous resolution on public access to documents;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to enhance the transparency of expert groups and comitology groups, by holding their meetings in public and publishing the recruitment procedure for members, as well as information regarding membership, proceedings, documents considered, votes, decisions and minutes of meetings, all of which should be published online in a standard formatsure appropriate transparency in relation to expert groups and comitology groups;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. RecCalls that Article 9 of Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 on sensitive documents is a compromise that no longer reflects the new cofor data relating to privacy, trade secrets and intellectual property and senstitutional and legal obligations in place since the Treaty of Lisbon entered into forceive information related to court cases and competition cases to be protected;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5
Subheading 5
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Expresses concern at the routineNotes the increasing application of the exception for the protection of international relations as a justification for the classification of documents; stresses that it is essential to provide adequate protection for sensitive documents drawn up in the context of international negotiations;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. RecallsPoints out that when an institution decides to refuse access to a document which it has been asked to disclose, it must, in principle, explain how disclosure of that document could specifically and actually undermine the public interest as to international relations state the reasons for which access has been refused;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Emphasises that opinions of the institutions’ legal services must, in principle, be discloshould be disclosed only after thorough consideration in each individual cased, as underlined by the Court’s ruling in Turco that ‘Regulation No 1049/2001 seeks, as indicated in recital 4 of the preamble and Article 1, to give the public a right of access to documents of the institutions which is as wide as possible’14 ; __________________ 14 Joined cases Sweden and Turco v Council and Commission (C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P), paragraph 35.