11 Amendments of Marietje SCHAAKE related to 2016/2324(INI)
Amendment 3 #
1. Deplores the fact that certain states often limit or restrict freedom of expression in order to silence dissent or criticism, including online by blocking mobile internet, restricting social media and banning communication with foreign groups; recalls that the long-term stability and resilience of a society can only be achieved and maintained by ensuring openness of the civic space and the rights to freedom of expression, opinion, peaceful assembly and association;
Amendment 8 #
1 a. Condemns the shrinking of civil society space as a result of acts of harassment and intimidation against civil society organisations and individual activists, who are solely exercising their rights of freedom of expression, assembly and association;calls on governments to investigate and to ensure accountability for this kind of actions and attacks directed against NGOs,
Amendment 9 #
1 a. Warns against the increase in the use of unnecessary and excessive force by security forces to repress assemblies, including by surveillance, arbitrary detention, torture and other ill-treatment, and the imposition of the death penalty;
Amendment 10 #
1 b. Expresses its concern on severe restrictions of the freedom of the press by certain states which dismantle independent media through harassment and repressive legislation, causing journalists and bloggers to choose between self-censorship, harassment and arrest, or exile;
Amendment 17 #
2. Considers that the EU should use its foreign policy instruments, including human rights and development instruments, to deal with the structural roots of the shrinking space problem and to design a multifaceted approach, since regimes are now using not only draconian NGO laws but also a wide range of direct and indirect tactics to limit the operation or financing of civil society organisations (CSOs), including those organisations deemed to be ‘foreign’, by measures such as arbitrary registration and reporting requirements, distorted criminal charges, raids and audits, and counterterrorism measures, travel bans and asset freezes; expresses concern that when civil society is able to legally receive foreign funding, they may be labelled as ‘foreign agents’, stigmatising them and significantly increasing the risks they face;
Amendment 20 #
2. Considers that the EU should use its foreign policy instruments, including human rights and development instruments, to deal with the structural roots of the shrinking space problem and to design a multifaceted approach, since regimes are now using not only draconian NGO laws but also a wide range of direct and indirect tactics to limit the operation or financing of civil society organisations (CSOs), such as arbitrary registration and reporting requirements, distorted criminal charges, including criminal defamatory laws, raids and audits, and counterterrorism measures;
Amendment 25 #
2 a. Warns against the misuse by certain states of an excessively broad definition of terrorism to silence journalists, human rights defenders and political dissidents;
Amendment 31 #
3. Calls on the Commission, the European External Action Service (EEAS), the Member States and the EU Special Representative for Human Rights to be more vocal, consistent and timely in expressing objections to restrictive CSO laws and to exert effective and tailored pressure on the host governments in question and raise this issue systematically in political and human rights dialogues; considers that EU actors could exert more positivstresses the role and encourages further involvement of the EU delegations in supporting civil society organisations and individual activists, including by offering assistance in judicial processes; considers that the EU should exert more conditionality bywhen allocating additional funds to those governments allowing a wider space forfinancial assistance to governments, based on the space allowed to civil society;
Amendment 34 #
3. Calls on the Commission, the European External Action Service (EEAS), the Member States and the EU Special Representative for Human Rights to be more vocal, consistent and timely in expressing objections to restrictive CSO laws and to exert effective and tailored pressure on the host governments in question and raise this issue systematically in political and human rights dialogues; calls on the EEAS to monitor trial proceedings of human rights defenders; considers that EU actors could exert more positive conditionality by allocating additional funds to those governments allowing a wider space for civil society;
Amendment 47 #
5. Requests the establishment of a ‘Shrinking Space Early Warning’ mechanism, with the involvement of the relevant EU institutions, capable of issuing an alert when a given government is preparing serious new restrictions against civil society, or when the government is using so-called government-organized non-governmental organisations (GONGOs) to simulate the existence of independent civil society, so that the EU is able to respond in a timelier, coordinated and tangible manner;
Amendment 58 #
6. Calls on the Commission to increaseallocate specific budget lines under the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) funds relevant toto address the shrinking space, sincedeplores theat annual sums per country are at an extremely low level; calls on the Commission to identify new forms of activism to be funded by the EIDHR and to put in place a more flexible and simplified procedure for accessing EIDHR funding, including more significant exceptions for those CSOs in particular danger and support for unregistered groups; considers that greater emphasis should be put on local groups and actors, since human rights issues are often experienced in a more real and acute way at local level;