Activities of Enrique GUERRERO SALOM related to 2014/2253(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the 30th and 31st Annual Reports on monitoring the application of EU Law (2012 and 2013)
Amendments (9)
Amendment 4 #
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 bhave the firsright to be made aware in a clear, transparent and timely manner (including via the internet) 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 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the introduction of the EU Pilot mechanism which, via its online platform, and with the involvement of citizens, civil society and the European Parliament itself, facilitates communication between the Commission and Member States so as to avoid, where possible, the need for infringement proceedings beingto be initiated wherever possible, but reminds the Commission; reminds the Commission that this is a cooperative instrument rather than a proxy one, meaning that this system must not in any way undermine the rights of EU citizens under the rule of law or serve to justify direct or indirect discrimination within the meaning of Article 9 TEU, and calls on the Commission to itself inform citizens in an appropriate and timely manner on the follow-up given to their reports of potential non-compliance;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Warmly welcomes the innovation in the Lisbon Treaty under which the Commission will be able to impose penalties on Member States for late transposition without needing to wait for an initial ruling;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Deplores the fact that the European Parliament, which is now a fully-fledged co-legislator and an institution directly representing the citizedirectly represents European citizens and fully co-legislates, being increasingly closely involved in complaints procedures, in particular via parliamentary questions or through the activities of the Committee on Petitions, does not yet automatically receive transparent and timely information on the implementation of EU laws, when such information is essential, including for purposes of adopting amendments aimed at improving those laws;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Regrets the fact that REFIT was the result of a unilateral decision by the Commission, with no real social and parliamentary dialogue;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Given the fact that the persistent delay in the transposition of directives is hindering the development of citizens’ rights, calls for the creation of a mechanism to prioritise the infringements that pose the greatest risks and have the greatest impact on citizens and businesses.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Emphasises that a certain degree of homogeneity is needed with regard to the transposition of legislation, without prejudice to the time required for the application thereof.
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Calls for a higher degree of cooperation between the Commission, the Member States, the European Parliament and the national parliaments.
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)
Paragraph 4 d (new)
4d. Calls for the legal status of ‘EU Pilot’ acts to be defined in order to guarantee the citizens’ right to an effective remedy, including at the pre-litigation stage.