7 Amendments of Lena DÜPONT related to 2020/2167(DEC)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with concern the findings of the Court of Auditors’ (the Court) in its special report1 ; takes the view that any future special report by the Court on the Agency's activities should include analysis regarding respect for and the protection of fundamental rights, where in line with its tasks and competences; _________________ 1 https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocu ments/SR21_08/SR_Frontex_EN.pdf
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes with regret the weaknesses detected with respect to the Agency’s primary activities and acknowledges that the Agency has fulfilled the vast majority of its tasks in support of the fight against irregular immigration and the fight against cross-border crime which are caused by an in; reiterates that for a complete implementation of the 2016 mandate and the failure of the Agency to take the measures necessary to adaptmore support is necessary to the Agency to ensure its corganisation to fullyrect functioning and implementation of thate mandate; notes with concern that the Court identifies a significant risk that the Agency will struggle to carry out the mandate given to it by Regulation (EU) 2019/18962 it was given under EBCGA 2.0; notes that the Agency has undergone a significant transformation with its mandate revised multiple times without prior impact assessments by the Commission and that many of the recommendations have already been put in place or are being implemented but could not be considered by the Court´s findings; acknowledges the gaps and inconsistencies of the information exchange network and further acknowledges the weaknesses in Member States’ implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1052/2013 establishing the European border surveillance system (EUROSUR); _________________ 2Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624 (OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concernedUnderstands that the Agency dicould not provide information about the impact or cost of its activities, more particularly about the real cost of its joint operations, either aggregated or disaggregated by operation (maritime and aerial) and type of costs (e.g. human resources and light equipment, or heavy equipment) due to unfeasibility of the use of unit costs due to the operational specificities as expressed by Member States to the Agency on multiple occasions; notes that therefore the Agency was only able to presents costs based on estimates that can reveal significant differences; is disappointed that the Agency’s operational reporting means that decision makers are noturges the Agency together with the Member States to enhance operational reporting to ensure adequately informedation of decision makers;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the recruitment of the fundamental rights officer, who took office on 1 June 2021, and the appointment of 20 fundamental rights monitors; regrets that 15 of those appointments were made at AST level which is not in keeping with the Agency’s mandate under Regulation (EU) 2019/1896points to the agreement of 2020 between the appointed FRO, a.i. and the Executive Director regarding the division of posts between AST4 and AD7 for future FRMs communicated to the Management Board as well as agreed with the Commission; reiterates that Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 provides for the recruitment of at least 40 fundamental rights monitors by 5 December 2020; insists that the Agency swiftly recruits the remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors and does so in AD positions;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that the OLAF investigation into Frontex is still ongoing; notes also that the European Ombudsman’s inquiry with respect to the Agency’s complaints mechanism, case OI/5/2020/MHZ, was closed on 15 June 2021, finding, amstating that no maladministrationg other things,ccurred, mentioning only a regrettable lack of transparency; notes in addition that the Agency’s management board has closed its investigation on 13 incidents in the Aegean Sea; recalls that Parliament’s Frontex Scrutiny Working Group has not yet completed its report on the allegations of violations of fundamental rights by the Agency;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Concludes that the increased competences and budget for the Agency need to be accompanied by a corresponding increase in accountability and transparency; stresses that discharge for the Agency is conditional on such accountability and transparency, especially on the Agency's commitment to Union law; stresses in this context the need for a full clarification of the alleged violfurthermore that the discharge procedure is an integral part of the implementations of fundamental rights at the external borderthe EU´s budgetary cycle and therefore needs to be objective and free of politicised positions;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Declares that, as all of the above issues have not been adequately clarified and presented by the Agency to Parliament, including the issues set out in the recent special report of the Court, and until the OLAF investigation is completed, the Parliament is not in a position to grant dischargee need for a revised discharge report in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2019 once the OLAF investigation is completed.