BETA

Activities of Axel VOSS related to 2018/0106(COD)

Legal basis opinions (1)

Protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law

Committee: JURI

Amendments (21)

Amendment 225 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. With a view to enhancing the enforcement of Union law and policies in specific areas, this Directive lays down common minimum standards for the protection of persons reporting on the following unlawful activities or abuse of law:
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) breaches relating to the internal market, as referred to in Article 26(2) TFEU, as regards acts which breach the rules of corporate tax or arrangements whose purpose is to obtain a tax advantage that defeats the object or purpose of the applicable corporate tax law.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 259 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) shareholders and persons belonging to the management body of an undertaking, including non-executive members, as well as volunteers and unpaid trainees;
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 264 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) any persons working under the supervision and direction of contractors, subcontractors and suppliers.deleted
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall also apply to reporting persons whose work-based relationship is yet to begin in cases where information concerning a breach has been acquired during the recruitment process or other pre-contractual negotiation.deleted
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. However, this Directive should not affect the protection of legal and other professional privilege as provided for under national law.
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘breaches’ means actual or potentiallikely unlawful activities or abuse of law relating to the Union acts and areas falling within the scope referred to in Article 1 and in the Annex;
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) ‘abuse of law’ means acts or omissions falling within the scope of Union law which do not appear to be unlawful in formal terms but defeat the object or the purpose pursued by the applicable rules;deleted
2018/09/11
Committee: JURI
Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Such channels and procedures shall allow for reporting by employees of the entity. They mayust allow for reporting by other persons who are in contact with the entity in the context of their work-related activities, referred to in Article 2(1)(b),(c) and (d), but the use of internal channels for reporting shall not be mandatory for these categories of personsc).
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 358 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
d) a reasonable timeframe, not exceeding three months or six months in duly justified cases following the report, to provide feedback to the reporting person about the follow-up to the report;
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The channels provided for in point (a) of paragraph 1 shall allow for reporting in all of the following ways:
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 365 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) written reports in electronic or paper format and/or oral report through telephone lines, whether recorded or unrecorded, or;
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 373 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Member States are creating a new information centre, which the informant can contact in order to get help in evaluating his/her suspicion.
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 387 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a
a) they are separated from general communication channels of the competent authority, including those through which the competent authority communicates internally and with third parties in its ordinary course of business;deleted
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 439 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – point c
c) the use of internal reporting channels was not mandatory for the reporting person, in accordance with Article 4(2);deleted
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 450 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. A person publicly disclosing information on breaches falling within the scope of this Directive shall qualify for protection under this Directive where: he or she first reported internally and/or externally in accordance with Chapters II and III and paragraph 2 of this Article, but: a) no appropriate action was taken in response to the report within the timeframe referred to in Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(1)(b); b) and there is immediate danger to life and health of individuals.
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 452 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a
a) he or she first reported internally and/or externally in accordance with Chapters II and III and paragraph 2 of this Article, but no appropriate action was taken in response to the report within the timeframe referred to in Articles 6(2)(b) and 9(1)(b); ordeleted
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 457 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point b
b) he or she could not reasonably be expected to use internal and/or external reporting channels due to imminent or manifest danger for the public interest, or to the particular circumstances of the case, or where there is a risk of irreversible damage.deleted
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 484 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 5
5. In judicial proceedings relating to a detriment suffered by the reporting person, and subject to him or her providing reasonable grounds to believe that the detriment was in retaliation for having made the report or disclosure, it shall be for the person who has taken the retaliatory measure to prove that the detriment was not a consequence of the report but was exclusively based on duly justified grounds.deleted
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 491 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The protection of personal data of the concerned person is crucial in order to avoid unfair treatment or reputational damages due to the disclosure of personal data, in particular data revealing the identity of a person concerned. Hence, in line with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (GDPR), competent authorities should establish adequate data protection procedures specifically geared to the protection of the reporting person, the concerned person and any third person referred to in the report that should include a secure system within the competent authority with restricted access rights for authorised staff only.
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI
Amendment 501 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties applicable to the reporting and other persons making malicious or abusive reports or disclosures, including measures for compensating persons who have suffered damage from malicious or abusive reports or disclosures.
2018/09/26
Committee: JURI