7 Amendments of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2016/2224(INI)
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Underlines that the EU institutions must be interested and show strong willingness to support the role of whistle- blowers and the benefits they bring in correcting wrongdoing; reminds the lack of follow-up and proper settlement regarding whistle-blowing cases at this level; considers a matter of urgency, before a Directive on the protection of whistle-blowers would be adopted, that the Commission Guidelines on the protection of whistle-blowers within the EU institutions are properly implemented and urges all institutions, including Agencies, to establish clear rules for the protection of whistle-blowers, as well as measures against ´´revolving doors´´;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Urges the European Court of Auditors and the European Ombudsman to publish, each, by the end of 2017: 1) special reports containing statistics and a clear track record of whistle-blowing cases identified in the European institutions, businesses, associations, organisations and other bodies registered in the Union; 2) the follow-up of the institutions concerned in relation to the cases revealed, based on the current Commission guidelines and rules; 3) the outcome of each investigation open as a result of the information received from whistle-blowers; 4) the measures foreseen in every case for the whistle-blowers´ protection;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its concern at retaliation against whistle-blowers in their personal and professional lives, and at the possibility of initiating criminal and civil judicial proceedings against whistle- blowers; considers that people who want to reveal irregularities, mismanagement, misuse of funds, maladministration or potential corruption related to the activity of public and private bodies within the Union are not truly protected and do not feel protected; this is why many of them use other means to reveal the wrongdoing or even refrain from acting; therefore, calls for the creation of a clear horizontal legal framework that includes definitions, protection against different forms of reprisals, and exemptions from criminal and civil proceedings, according to criteria to be established; strongly believes that this will increase the citizens´ trust in their European and national bodies;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for the creation of legal and secure disclosure channels at national and European level to facilitate reporting to the competent authorities of information on threats to the public interest; underlines the importance of confidentiality in all whistle-blowing related files and recalls that basic rules for the protection of anonymous whistle-blowers should be put in place, in cases where such protection is required;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Reminds the crucial role played by investigative journalists in revealing wrongdoing and stresses that they are an exposed group of professionals, often paying with their jobs, freedom and even their lives disclosures of massive irregularities and corruption schemes; calls for the inclusion of special measures to protect investigative journalists in a horizontal Proposal for the protection of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Calls for the establishment of an independent advisory and referral Unit within the European Ombudsman in a position to receive reports, complaints, gather information and adequately advise on the protection of whistle-blowers;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Emphasises that non- governmental organisations are not excepted from attempts of maladministration, fraud, misuse of funds and other irregularities and considers that rules for whistle-blowers in the public and private sector should equally apply to NGOs;