Activities of Nuno MELO related to 2021/0394(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice in cross-border civil, commercial and criminal matters, and amending certain acts in the field of judicial cooperation
Amendments (26)
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1 a) Mere access to judicial authorities does not automatically constitute effective access to justice. The digital switchover is a key step towards improving not only access to justice, but the efficiency, quality and transparency of justice systems.
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2 a) Digitalisation of proceedings in civil and criminal matters should be encouraged with the aim of strengthening the rule of law and the fundamental rights guarantees in the Union, particularly by facilitating access to justice and effective judicial protection.
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) This Regulation seeks to improve the effectiveness and speed of judicial procedures and facilitate access to justice by digitalising the existing communication channels, which should lead to cost and time savings, reduction of the administrative burden, and improved resilience in force majeure circumstances for all authorities involved in cross-border judicial cooperation. The use of digital channels of communication between competent authorities should lead to reduced delays in processing of the cases, which should benefit individuals and legal entities. This is also particularly important in the area of cross-border criminal proceedings in the context of the Union’s fight against crime. In this regard, the high level of security that digital channels of communication can provide constitutes a step forward, also with respect to safeguarding the rights of the persons concerned and protection of their privacy and personal data, strengthening confidence in justice systems and increasing the possibility of achieving a higher degree of compliance with the rule of law.
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) This Regulation seeks to improve the efficiency and effectiveness and speed of judicial procedures and facilitate access to justice by digitalising the existing communication channels, which should lead to cost and time savings, reduction of the administrative burden, and improved resilience in force majeure circumstances for all authorities involved in cross-border judicial cooperation. The use of digital channels of communication between competent authorities should lead to reduced delays in processing of the cases, which should benefit individuals and legal entities. This is also particularly important in the area of cross-border criminal proceedings in the context of the Union’s fight against crime. In this regard, the high level of security that digital channels of communication can provide constitutes a step forward, also with respect to safeguarding the rights of the persons concerned and protection of their privacy and personal data.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) It is important that appropriate channels are developed to ensure that justice systems can efficiently cooperate digitally. Therefore, it is essential to establish, at Union level, an information technology instrument that allows swift, direct, interoperable, reliable and secure, secure and efficient cross-border electronic exchange of case related data among competent authorities.
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In order to facilitate oral hearings in proceedings in civil, commercial and criminal matters with cross-border implications, this Regulation should provide for the optional use of videoconferencing or other distance communication technology for the participation of the parties in such hearings. The procedure for applying and conducting of hearings through videoconferencing or other distance communication technology should be governed by the law of the Member State conducting the videoconference. CMember States should make every effort to ensure that videoconferencing is available in cross-border proceedings. However, conducting a hearing by videoconferencing or other distance communication technology should not be refused solely based on the non-existence of national rules governing the use of distance communication technology. In such cases the most appropriate rules available under the national law, such as rules for taking of evidence, should apply mutatis mutandis.
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. This Regulation shall apply only to existing procedures and does not amend rules of these procedures in substance.
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Where electronic communication in accordance with paragraph 1 is not possible due to the disruption of the decentralised IT system, the nature of the transmitted material o, the sensitive nature of criminal proceedings or other exceptional circumstances, the transmission shall be carried out by the swiftest, most appropriate and reliable alternative means, taking into account the need to ensure a secure and reliable exchange of informationensuring a secure exchange of information, based on the assessment of competent national authorities.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. Where the use of the decentralised IT system is not appropriate in view of the specific circumstances of the communication in question, any other means of communication may be used by the competent authority.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a The obligations set out in the Article 3 (1), (2) and (3) and the possibility to use alternative means of exchanging information do not affect the admissibility of the evidence collected.
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Written electronic communication between natural or legal persons and competent authorities falling within the scope of the legal acts listed in Annex I, may be carried out by the following electronic means:
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
Hearing through videoconferencing or other distance communication technology in cross-border civil and commercial matters
Amendment 246 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. During the remote hearing, the court should be able to continuously monitor the quality of the image and sound of the video connection in order to ensure that any technical problems do not affect the right of the parties to participate effectively in the proceedings
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Hearing through videoconferencing or other distance communication technology in cross-border criminal proceedings
Amendment 280 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4
Article 8 – paragraph 4
4. The confidentiality of communication between suspects, accused or convicted persons and their lawyer before and during the hearing through videoconferencing or other distance communication technology shall be ensured. The defendants should be able to communicate with their legal representative over a secured system. The use of a secured line, different from the video connection provided for the remote hearing,´will be ensured.
Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7
Article 8 – paragraph 7
7. A suspect, an accused and the convicted person shall havebe informed about the right to an effective legal remedy under national law in the event of a breach of this Article.
Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to ensure that, where the person is being heard within its territory in accordance with this Article and refuses to testify when under an obligation or does not testify the truth, its national law applies in the same way as if the hearing took place in a national procedure.
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7 b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. On the conclusion of the videoconference, the national authority shall draw up minutes indicating the date and place of the hearing, the identity of the person heard, the identities and functions of all other persons participating in the videoconference, any oaths taken and the technical conditions under which the hearing took place.
Amendment 291 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 7 c (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 7 c (new)
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. Every fivetwo years after the date of application of Article 25, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Regulation and present to the European Parliament and to the Council a report supported by information supplied by the Member States and collected by the Commission.
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter VI a (new)
Chapter VI a (new)
VI a Training Member States shall provide the competent authorities, judges, court staff, and legal practitioners with sufficient training in IT solutions. Member States shall encourage the authorities to share best videoconferencing practices in order to reduce costs and increase efficiency.
Amendment 330 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall start using the decentralised IT system referred to in Articles 3(1), and 5(1) and (2) from the first day of the month following the period of twone years after the adoption of the implementing act referred to in Article 12(3).
Amendment 332 #
2. Member States shall start using the decentralised IT system referred to in Articles 3(1), and 5(1) and (2) from the first day of the month following the period of twoone years after the adoption of the implementing act referred to in Article 12(4).
Amendment 334 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. Member States shall start using the decentralised IT system referred to in 3(1), and 5(1) and (2) from the first day of the month following the period of twoone years after the adoption of the implementing act referred to in Article 12(5).
Amendment 336 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shall start using the decentralised IT system referred to in 3(1), and 5(1) and (2) from the first day of the month following the period of twoone years after the adoption of the implementing act referred to in Article 12(6).
Amendment 338 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
It shall apply from [the first day of the month following the period of twoone years after the date of entry into force].