87 Amendments of Ernst STRASSER
Amendment 144 #
2010/2209(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Encourages the Member States to pay extra attention in terms of how domestic violence impacts children specifically as the rates of battering and sexual abuse on children are greater in homes where the female is beaten or emotionally abused and to devote appropriate resources in order to help children who are experiencing domestic violence;
Amendment 117 #
2010/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. considers the question of freedom of religion or belief worldwide a key issue for the CFSP; stresses that it is not only a core human right, but also an instrument to tackle religiously motivated discrimination and violence and thus contributes to political and societal stability; therefore calls on the VP/HR to develop, as a matter of urgency, an EU strategy on the enforcement of the human right to freedom of religion or belief;
Amendment 124 #
2010/0802(COD)
Draft directive
Article - 1 (new)
Article - 1 (new)
Amendment 132 #
2010/0802(COD)
Draft directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2) “"Protection measure”" means a decision adopted by a competent authority of a Member State imposing on a person causing dangerin the issuing State in the context of criminal proceedings by which one or more of the obligations or prohibitions, referred to in Article 2(2), provided that the infringement of such obligations or prohibitions constitutes a criminal offence under the law of the Member State concerned or may otherwise be punishable by a deprivation of liberty in that Member Stateare imposed on a person causing danger, for the benefit of a protected person with a view to protecting the latter against a criminal act which may endanger his life, physical or psychological integrity, personal liberty or sexual integrity.
Amendment 83 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Child pornography, which constitutes sex abuse images, is a specific type of content which cannot be construed as the expression of an opinion. To combat it, it is necessary to reduce the circulation of child abuse material by making it more difficult for offenders to upload such content onto the publicly accessible Web. Action is therefore necessary to remove the content at source and apprehend those guilty of making, distributing or downloading child sex abuse images. The EU, in particular through increased cooperation with third countries and international organisations, should seek to facilitate the effective removal by third country authorities of websites containing child pornography, which are hosted in their territory. However as, despite such efforts, the removal of child pornography content at its source proves to be difficultis often not possible where the original materials are not located within the EU, either because the State where the servers are hosted is not willing to cooperate or because obtaining removal of the material from the State concerned proves to be particularly long. Therefore, mechanisms should also be put in place to block access from the Union's territory to internet pages identified as containing or disseminating child pornography. For that purpose, different mechanisms can be used as appropriate, including facilitating the competent judicial or police authorities to order such blocking, or via non legislative measures supporting and stimulating Internet Service Providers on a voluntary basis to develop codes of conduct and guidelines for blocking access to such Internet pages. Both with a view to the removal and the blocking of child abuse content, cooperation between public authorities should be established and strengthened, particularly in the interest of ensuring that national lists of websites containing child pornography material are as complete as possible and of avoiding duplication of work. Any such developments must take account of the rights of the end users, adhere to existing legal and judicial procedures and comply with the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The Safer Internet Programme has set up a network of hotlines whose goal is to collect information and to ensure coverage and exchange of reports on the major types of illegal content online.
Amendment 93 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
(b) "child pornography" or "child sex abuse material" shall mean
Amendment 119 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Causing or recruiting a child to participate in pornographic performances, or profiting from or otherwise exploiting a child for such purposes, shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two yearsfive years if the child has not reached the age of sexual consent, or of at least two years if the child is over that age.
Amendment 124 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Amendment 131 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Knowingly attending pornographic performances involving the participation of a children shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least two years if the child has not reached the age of sexual consent or of at least one year if the child is over that age.
Amendment 134 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Amendment 140 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 6
Article 4 – paragraph 6
6. Causing or recruiting a child to participate in child prostitution shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years. , or profiting from or otherwise exploiting a child for such purposes, shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least eight years if the child has not reached the age of sexual consent and of at least five years of imprisonment if the child is over that age.
Amendment 144 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 7
Article 4 – paragraph 7
Amendment 150 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 8
Article 4 – paragraph 8
8. Engaging in sexual activities with a child, where recourse is made to child prostitution shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years if the child has not reached the age of sexual consent and of at least two years of imprisonment if the child is over that age.
Amendment 155 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 9
Article 4 – paragraph 9
9. Coercing or forcing a child to participate in pornographic performances, or threatening a child for such purposes shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least eight years if the child has not reached the age of sexual consent, or of at least five years if the child is over that age.
Amendment 160 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 10
Article 4 – paragraph 10
Amendment 166 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 11
Article 4 – paragraph 11
11. Coercing or forcing a child into child prostitution, or threatening a child for such purposes, shall be punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of at least ten years if the child has not reached the age of sexual consent and of at least five years of imprisonment if the child is over that age.
Amendment 224 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the measure referred to in paragraph 1 is entered in the criminal record of the convicting Member State. employers, when recruiting a person for professional activities involving regular contacts with children, are entitled to be informed, in accordance with national law, by any appropriate way, such as direct access, access upon request or via the person concerned, of the existence of convictions for an offence referred to in Articles 3 to 7 entered in the criminal record, or of any disqualification to exercise activities involving regular contacts with children arising from a conviction for an offence referred to in Article 3 to 7. If serious suspicion should arise during working relations, employers may, in accordance with national law, request such information even after the recruitment procedure. Member States authorities shall ensure, by any appropriate means and in accordance with national law, that such information may also be obtained from the criminal records held in other Member States.
Amendment 304 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) interviews with the child victim shall take place, as far as possible, not in presence of the offender;
Amendment 327 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to obtain the blocking of access by Internet users in their territory to Internet pages contaimmediate removal of depictions of sexual acts involving persons under the age of 18 years in ing or disseminating child pornography. The blocking of access shall be subject toformation and communication services. The removal of such content shall be undertaken in accordance with national procedures and with adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the blocking is limited to what is necessary, that users are informed of the reason for the blocking and thatit is confined to what is strictly necessary. In addition, the European Union shall conduct negotiations with third countries with the aim of securing the prompt removal of such content pfroviders, as far as possible, are informed of the possibility of challenging im servers on their territory. Furthermore, the Member States and institutions of the Union and Europol shall step up cooperation with international hotlines, such as INHOPE, with the aim of securing the prompt removal of such content.
Amendment 333 #
2010/0064(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the above, Member States shall take the necessary measures to obtain the removal of internet pages containing or disseminating child pornographyhere the removal of webpages containing or disseminating child pornography is not possible, Member States shall take the necessary measures, whether legislative or non-legislative, to ensure that the blocking of access to webpages containing or disseminating child pornography is possible towards the Internet users in their territory. The blocking of access shall be subject to adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the blocking, taking into account technical characteristics, is limited to what is necessary, that users are informed of the reason for the blocking and that content providers, as far as possible, are informed of the possibility of challenging it.
Amendment 120 #
2010/0039(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point iii a (new)
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(iiia) the following point shall be added: “(ia) surveillance of the application of the Schengen acquis.”
Amendment 121 #
2010/0039(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point iii a (new)
Article 1 – point 3 – point a – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(iiia) the following point shall be added: “(ia) participation in the system for assessing the application of the Schengen acquis.”
Amendment 175 #
2010/0039(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 6 a (new)
Article 1 – point 6 a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 4 a (new)
Article 4 a (new)
(6a) The following Article is inserted: "Article 4a Assessment of the Schengen acquis The Agency shall take all necessary measures to constantly assess the Schengen acquis. This shall be done in cooperation with the Schengen Member States. The assessment reports shall be made available to the EU Institutions and the Member States.”
Amendment 241 #
2010/0039(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 16
Article 1 – point 16
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 14 – paragraph 7
Article 14 – paragraph 7
Amendment 248 #
2010/0039(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 20 – point a – point i
Article 1 – point 20 – point a – point i
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point h
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – point h
(h) establish the organisational structure of the Agency and adopt the Agency's staff policy, in particular the multi-annual staff policy plan and submit the latter, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of the general Financial Regulation, to the Commission and the budgetary authority after receiving a favourable opinion of the Commission;.
Amendment 252 #
2010/0039(COD)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 23
Article 1 – point 23
Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004
Article 33 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 33 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The evaluation shall analyse the needs for the Agency to employ independent border guards acting under the instructions of the Agency, including a detailed description of the legal framework that would need to be set in place for that purpose.
Amendment 379 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
Paragraph 67
67. Calls for a five-year national plan for the elimination of illicit opium crops, with specific deadlines and benchmarks , to be implemented through a dedicated office with its own budget and staff;
Amendment 381 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67 a (new)
Paragraph 67 a (new)
67 a. Commends the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) for its active work to support the Government of Afghanistan in its struggle against illicit drugs, and calls for the strengthening of UNODC and its programmes in Afghanistan;
Amendment 383 #
2009/2217(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
Paragraph 68
Amendment 13 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the European Union must adopt a strategic view of its relations with its southern neighbours and move beyond cooperation driven solely by considerations pertaining to security and migration,
Amendment 37 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, for the last 15 years or so, Mediterranean countries have been developing new trading and economic partners (Russia, China, Brazil and the Gulf monarchies) and their societies have been undergoing radical changes (in terms of consumption patterns, mobility, demographic transitions and so on) with implications for internal territorial balances,
Amendment 49 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the UfM’s two major innovations, namely its institutional set-up (co-presidency, joint permanent committee and secretariat) and operational focus (integration projects), must function effectively and transparently,
Amendment 53 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the UfM’s secretariat needs to become the structure’s linchpin, whereas its effectiveness will depend on the ability of its staff to work independently and whereas the presence of a seniorn Israeli official and a senior Palestinian officiDeputy Secretary General cooperating within an international organisation secretariat at regional level is unprecedented and gives grounds for hope,
Amendment 62 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
Amendment 68 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. having regard to the crucial importance of the capital flows represented by the funds migrants send to people inof countries on the southern shore of the Mediterranean,
Amendment 84 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the governments of the UfM member countries to establish an ongoing and open political dialogue characterised by mutual respect and understanding, and reaffirms its desire to see the promotion of democracy and respect for human rights and individual and collectivefundamental freedoms made the central focus of that dialogue;
Amendment 120 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 - point 6
Paragraph 4 - point 6
- ensuring smooth cooperation between the secretariat and the European Commission, and clearly defining their respective remits;
Amendment 136 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 - point 1
Paragraph 6 - point 1
- calls on the UfM’s members to allocate project funding commensurate with the issues at stake, and expects an historic commitment from participants at the Barcelona Summit;
Amendment 138 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 - point 2
Paragraph 6 - point 2
- emphasises that, in the period leading up to the end of the 2007-2013 financial perspectives, any financial contributions made by the Union should not affect existing or planned Euro-Mediterranean regional projects; underlines the need to increase substantially the funds allocated to the UfM in the EU’s forthcoming financial perspectives for 2014-2020;
Amendment 144 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 - point 3
Paragraph 6 - point 3
- welcomes the steps taken by financial institutions at national, European (EIB- FEMIP, EBRD) and international (World Bank) level which are already active in the region, emphasises the need to identify synergies in connection with major projects, and proposes that a Euro- Mediterranean investment and development bank be set up to consolidate the North-South parity basis on which the UfM operates;
Amendment 151 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 - point 4
Paragraph 6 - point 4
- welcomes the recent launch of investment funds for the financing of UfM projects, including the InfraMed fund for infrastructure projects, and calls on the various stakeholders to encourage the development of similar initiatives;
Amendment 167 #
2009/2215(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Invites UfM member countries to simplify transfers of funds byfrom migrants to people in countries on the southern stheir horme of the Mediterraneancountries, in particular by endeavouring to reduce the costs incurred;
Amendment 29 #
2009/2133(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – point f
Paragraph 5 – point f
(f) the building of an "esprit de corps" through joint training and professional development is essential for the EEAS's ultimate objective of creating a framework of integrated diplomacy that brings together national and European levels of diplomacy; in order to develop a common European diplomatic culture in the EU's international relations, joint training programmes and a common diplomatic syllabus will be required; the existing training measures and networks of diplomatic training centres could usefully be enhanced. They could also possibly be brought together in a European Diplomatic Academy based, amongst others, on appropriate establishments of the Member States;
Amendment 85 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point p a (new)
Article 2 – point p a (new)
(pa) "subsequent application" means a further application after a final decision;
Amendment 153 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. Applicants for international protection shall be given the opportunity to consult in an effective manner a legal adviser or other counsellor, admitted or permitted as such under national law, on matters relating to their applications for international protection, at all stages of thethroughout procedure,s including following a negative decision accordance with Chapter III and V.
Amendment 159 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 163 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 174 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 215 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Member States may extend that time limit for a period not exceeding a further 6 months in individual cases involving complex issues of fact and law, including cases of applicants with special needs, and in the case of arrivals involving a large number of third-country nationals or stateless persons lodging applications for international protection.
Amendment 217 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 27 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Member States may prioritise or accelerate an examination of an application for international protection in accordance with the basic principles and guarantees of Chapter II:
Amendment 222 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point a a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point a a (new)
(aa) the applicant clearly does not qualify as a refugee or for refugee status in a Member State under Directive […./../EC] [the Qualification Directive]; or
Amendment 224 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point b
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point b
(b) the applicant is from a safe country of origin within the meaning of this Directive, or from a country which is not a Member State but is considered to be a safe third country for the applicant, or
Amendment 225 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point c a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point c a (new)
(ca) the applicant has filed another application for asylum stating other personal data with a different content; or
Amendment 226 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point d a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point d a (new)
(da) the applicant has made clearly inconsistent, contradictory, improbable, insufficient or false representations which make his/her claim clearly unconvincing in relation to his/her having been the object of persecution referred to in Directive […./../EC] [the Qualification Directive]; or
Amendment 227 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point d b (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point d b (new)
(db) the applicant has submitted a subsequent application which clearly does not raise any relevant new elements with respect to his/her particular circumstances or to the situation in his/her country of origin; or
Amendment 228 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point d c (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point d c (new)
(dc) the applicant has failed without reasonable cause to make his/her application earlier, having had opportunity to do so; or
Amendment 230 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point f a (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point f a (new)
(fa) the applicant has failed without good reason to comply with his/her obligations to cooperate in the examination of the facts of his/her case and the establishment of his/her identity referred to in Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive […/../EC] [the Qualification Directive] or in Article 12(1) and (2)(a), (b) and (c) and Article 24(1) of this Directive; or
Amendment 231 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point f b (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point f b (new)
(fb) the applicant entered the territory of the Member State unlawfully or prolonged his/her stay unlawfully and, without good reason, has either not presented himself/herself to the authorities and/or filed an application for asylum as soon as possible, given the circumstances of his/her entry; or
Amendment 232 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point f c (new)
Article 27 – paragraph 6 – point f c (new)
(fc) the applicant may for serious reasons be considered a danger to the national security of the Member State, or the applicant has been forcibly expelled for serious reasons of public security and public order under national law.
Amendment 233 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 7
Article 27 – paragraph 7
7. In cases of unfounded applications, as referred to in Article 28, in which any of the circumstances listed in paragraph 6 apply, Member States may reject an application as manifestly unfounded following an adequate and complete examination.
Amendment 238 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) the applicant has lodged an identical subsequent application after a final decisionin accordance with Article2(pa);
Amendment 256 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
In the case of subsequent applications, Member States may derogate from their obligations under Articles 7, 9, 11 and 18, as they were already fulfilled within the former procedure.
Amendment 258 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 35 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
8. If, following a final decision to consider a subsequent application inadmissible pursuant to Article 29 (2) (d) or a final decision to reject a subsequent application as unfounded, the person concerned lodges a new application for international protection in the same Member State before a return decision has been enforced, that Member State may:
Amendment 274 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 3
Article 41 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the effective remedy referred to in paragraph 1 provides for a full examination of both facts and points of law, including an ex nunc examination of the international protection needs pursuant to Directive […./../EC] [the Qualification Directive], at least in appeal procedures before a court or tribunal of first instance.
Amendment 275 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 5
Article 41 – paragraph 5
5. Without prejudice to paragraph 6 and 7, the remedy provided for in paragraph 1 of this Article shall have the effect of allowing applicants to remain in the Member State concerned pending its outcome.
Amendment 278 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
6. In the case of a decision taken in the accelerated procedure pursuant to Article 27 (6) and of a decision to consider an application inadmissible pursuant to Article 29 (2) (d), and where the right to remain in the Member State pending the outcome of the remedy is not foreseen under national legislation, a court or tribunal shall have the power to rule whether or not the applicant may remain on the territory of the Member State, either upon request of the concerned applicant or acting on its own motion.
Amendment 280 #
2009/0165(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 41 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. In the case of an application which is inadmissible pursuant to Article 29(2)(d) and where a valid expulsion order is in force, Member States may not allow the applicant to remain in their territory pending the outcome of the remedy.
Amendment 43 #
2009/0164(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – point j – indent 5
Article 2 – point j – indent 5
Amendment 70 #
2009/0164(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. When implementing this Chapter, Member States shall take into account the specific situation of vulnerable persons such as minors, unaccompanied minors, disabled people, elderly people, pregnant women, single parents with minor children, victims of trafficking, persons with mental health problems and persons who have been subjected to torture, rape or other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence.
Amendment 80 #
2009/0164(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – subparagraph 1
Article 24 – subparagraph 1
As soon as possible after their status has been granted, Member States shall issue to beneficiaries of international protectionrefugee status a residence permit which must be valid for at least three years and renewable unless compelling reasons of national security or public order otherwise require, and without prejudice to Article 21(3).
Amendment 82 #
2009/0164(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – subparagraph 2
Article 24 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 93 #
2009/0164(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. By way of exception to the general rule laid down in paragraph 1, Member States may limit social assistance granted to beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status to core benefits which will then be provided at the same levels and under the same eligibility conditions as they are to nationals.
Amendment 4 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The visa liberalisation dialogue initiated by the Commission, with a regional approach and a European perspective, includes all the Western Balkan countries, namely Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia, on an equal footing and without any discrimination. The composition of the lists of third countries in Annexes I and II to Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 should be, and should remain, consistent with the criteria laid down in recital (5) thereto. Some third countries, for which the situation has changed as regards these criteria,The same criteria laid down in the roadmap for visa liberalisation should be applied to all countries concerned. Some of the Western Balkan countries that have met the benchmarks should be admitted to the visa-free travel regime from 1 January 2010. Those countries that, despite having made substantial progress, have not fully met the benchmarks should be tgransferred from one Annex to the other. ted the same privilege as soon as they meet the benchmarks as set out in the roadmap.
Amendment 7 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The visa liberalisation dialogue initiated by the Commission with a regional approach and a European perspective, includes countries of the Western Balkans, namely Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia on an equal footing and without any discrimination. The composition of the lists of third countries in Annexes I and II to Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 should be, and should remain, consistent with the criteria laid down in recital (5) thereto. Some third countries, for which the situation has changed as regards these criteria, should be transferred from one Annex to the otherThe same criteria laid down in the roadmaps for visa liberalisation should be applied to all countries concerned.
Amendment 8 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) With the aim of furthering the implementation of the Thessaloniki agenda and as part of the regional approach, the Commission should start a visa dialogue with Kosovo and establish a tailor-made roadmap for visa facilitation and liberalisation similar to the roadmap established with other Western Balkan countries. This should be without prejudice to Member States' competence as regards the recognition of Kosovo as an independent state.
Amendment 8 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) All of the Western Balkan countries that have met the benchmarks should be admitted to the visa-free travel regime from the beginning of 2010. Those countries that, despite having made substantial progress, have not fully met the benchmarks should be granted the same privilege as soon as they meet the benchmarks as set out in the corresponding roadmaps for visa liberalisation.
Amendment 11 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) With the aim of furthering the implementation of the Thessaloniki agenda and as part of its regional approach, the Commission should start a visa dialogue with Kosovo and establish a tailor-made roadmap for visa facilitation and liberalisation similar to those established with other Western Balkan countries. This should be without prejudice to Member States' competence as regards the recognition of Kosovo as an independent state.
Amendment 13 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
Amendment 14 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4b) The Council, while commending the relevant recent progress achieved by Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina towards meeting the benchmarks, calls on the relevant Albanian and Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities to adopt, without delay, the necessary reforms to fully meet the benchmarks.
Amendment 15 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Recital 4 c (new)
Recital 4 c (new)
(4c) The Council asks the Commission to assist the relevant Albanian and Bosnian and Herzegovina authorities in this respect.
Amendment 15 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) As regards Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Commission should, without delay and not later than in the spring of 2010, present its report on the achievements made by those two countries in meeting all the benchmarks set in the roadmap.
Amendment 16 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
Amendment 17 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 c (new)
Recital 4 c (new)
(4c) The Council, while commending the relevant recent progress achieved by Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina towards meeting the benchmarks, calls on the relevant Albanian and Bosnia and Herzegovina authorities to adopt, without delay, the necessary reforms to fully meet the benchmarks.
Amendment 18 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation – amending act
Article 1 – point 1 – point -a (new)
Article 1 – point 1 – point -a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 539/2001
Annex I – Part 1
Annex I – Part 1
(-a) in Part 1, double asterisks ** and a corresponding footnote should be added to the references to Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina, as follows: "Albania **" "Bosnia and Herzegovina **" ------------------- "** The exemption from the visa requirement granted to holders of biometric passports will apply on the basis of a legislative act to be adopted following the presentation of a corresponding proposal by the European Commission."
Amendment 18 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 d (new)
Recital 4 d (new)
(4d) The Council asks the Commission to assist the relevant authorities of Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina in this respect.
Amendment 21 #
2009/0104(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 - paragraph 1 - point a a (new)
Article 1 - paragraph 1 - point a a (new)
Regulation (EC) No 539/2001
Annex I - part 1
Annex I - part 1
(aa) in Part 1, the references to Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina are replaced by the following: "Albania**, Bosnia and Herzegovina ** ------------------- ** The exemption from the visa requirement granted to holders of biometric passports will apply in accordance with Community law"
Amendment 1 #
2009/0036(NLE)
Proposal for a decision
Recommendation
Recommendation
The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, as the committee responsible, to rejectapprove the proposal.