Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | LIBE | GRIESBECK Nathalie ( ALDE) | GÁL Kinga ( PPE), SIPPEL Birgit ( S&D), UJAZDOWSKI Kazimierz Michał ( ECR), ALBRECHT Jan Philipp ( Verts/ALE), FERRARA Laura ( EFDD) |
Former Responsible Committee | LIBE | ||
Committee Opinion | JURI | DURAND Pascal ( Verts/ALE) | |
Former Committee Opinion | JURI | Therese COMODINI CACHIA ( PPE) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 082-p2
Legal Basis:
TFEU 082-p2Subjects
Events
PURPOSE: to ensure the right to a fair trial by setting out common minimum standards on certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings.
NON-LEGISLATIVE ACT: Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings.
CONTENT: this Directive lays down common minimum rules concerning: (a) certain aspects of the presumption of innocence in criminal proceedings; (b) the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings. It upholds the fundamental rights and principles recognised by the Charter and by the ECHR. It aims to enhance the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings by laying down common minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at the trial.
This Directive aims to strengthen the trust of Member States in each other's criminal justice systems and thus to facilitate mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters.
Scope : this Directive applies to natural persons who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings. It applies at all stages of the criminal proceedings , from the moment when a person is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, or an alleged criminal offence, until the decision on the final determination of whether that person has committed the criminal offence concerned has become definitive.
Presumption of innocence : Member States shall ensure that suspects and accused persons are presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law .
Under this Directive:
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that, for as long as a suspect or an accused person has not been proved guilty according to law, public statements made by public authorities, and judicial decisions, other than those on guilt, do not refer to that person as being guilty. This shall be without prejudice to acts of the prosecution which aim to prove the guilt of the suspect or accused person, and to preliminary decisions of a procedural nature, which are taken by judicial or other competent authorities and which are based on suspicion or incriminating evidence; public statements made by public authorities, and judicial decisions, other than those on guilt, must not refer to that person as being guilty for as long as a suspect or an accused person has not been proved guilty according to law; the competent authorities should abstain from presenting suspects or accused persons as being guilty, in court or in public, through the use of measures of physical restraint , unless the use of such measures is required for case-specific reasons, either relating to security; the burden of proof for establishing the guilt of suspects and accused persons is on the prosecution, and any doubt should benefit the suspect or accused person.
Right to remain silent and right not to incriminate oneself : the exercise by suspects and accused persons of the right to remain silent or of the right not to incriminate oneself shall not be used against them and shall not be considered to be evidence that they have committed the criminal offence concerned.
With regard to minor offences , the conduct of the proceedings, or certain stages thereof, may take place in writing or without questioning of the suspect or accused person by the competent authorities in relation to the offence concerned, provided that this complies with the right to a fair trial.
Right to be present at the trial : Member States shall ensure that suspects and accused persons have the right to be present at their trial. They may provide that a trial which can result in a decision on the guilt or innocence of a suspect or accused person can be held in his or her absence, provided that: the suspect or accused person has been informed, in due time, of the trial and of the consequences of non-appearance; or the suspect or accused person, having been informed of the trial, is represented by a mandated lawyer, who was appointed either by the suspect or accused person or by the State.
Where Member States provide for the possibility of holding trials in the absence of suspects or accused persons but it is not possible to comply with the conditions because a suspect or accused person cannot be located despite reasonable efforts having been made, Member States may provide that a decision can nevertheless be taken and enforced. In that case, Member States shall ensure that when suspects or accused persons are informed of the decision, in particular when they are apprehended, they are also informed of the possibility to challenge the decision and of the right to a new trial or to another legal remedy.
As regards the right to a new trial , Member States shall ensure that those suspects and accused persons have the right to be present, to participate effectively, in accordance with procedures under national law, and to exercise the rights of the defence.
Remedies : Member States shall ensure that suspects and accused persons have an effective remedy if their rights under this Directive are breached.
Data collection and reporting : Member States shall, by 1 April 2020 and every three years thereafter, send to the Commission available data showing how the rights laid down in this Directive have been implemented.
The Commission shall, by 1 April 2021 , submit a report on the implementation of this Directive.
ENTRY INTO FORCE: 31.3.2016.
TRANSPOSITION: 1.4.2018.
The European Parliament adopted by 577 votes to 48 with 86 abstentions, a legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings.
Parliament’s position, adopted in first reading following the ordinary legislative procedure, amended the Commission proposal as follows:
Scope: the Directive applies to natural persons who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings. It applies at all stages of the criminal proceedings , from the moment when a person is suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, or an alleged criminal offence, until the decision on the final determination of whether that person has committed the criminal offence concerned has become definitive .
Legal actions and remedies that are available only once that decision has become definitive, including actions before the European Court of Human Rights, should not fall within the scope of the Directive.
Public references to guilt : public statements made by public authorities, and judicial decisions, other than those on guilt, must not refer to that person as being guilty for as long as a suspect or an accused person has not been proved guilty according to law, appropriate measures must be available in the event of a breach of the obligation.
However, the obligation not to refer to suspects or accused persons as being guilty should not prevent public authorities from publicly disseminating information on the criminal proceedings where this is strictly necessary for reasons relating to the criminal investigation, such as when video material is released and the public is asked to help in identifying the alleged perpetrator of the criminal offence or to the public interest.
Presentation of suspects and accused persons : competent authorities should abstain from presenting suspects or accused persons as being guilty, in court or in public, through the use of measures of physical restraint , such as handcuffs, glass boxes, cages and leg irons),
Member States may apply measures of physical restraint that are required for case-specific reasons, relating to security or to the prevention of suspects or accused persons from absconding or from having contact with third persons.
Burden of proof : the text states that that the burden of proof for establishing the guilt of suspects and accused persons is on the prosecution. However, in various Member States not only the prosecution, but also judges and competent courts are charged with seeking both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence . Parliament provided that Member States which do not have an adversarial system should be able to maintain their current system provided that it complies with the Directive and with other relevant provisions of Union and international law.
In addition, any doubt as to the question of guilt must be to benefit the suspect or accused person, including where the court assesses whether the person concerned should be acquitted.
Right to remain silent and right not to incriminate oneself : suspects and accused persons will have the right to remain silent in relation to the criminal offence that they are suspected or accused of having committed, and have the right not to incriminate themselves. These rights imply that competent authorities should not compel suspects or accused persons to provide information if those persons do not wish to do so.
The exercise of the right to remain silent or the right not to incriminate oneself should not be used against a suspect or accused person and should not, in itself, be considered to be evidence that the person concerned has committed the criminal offence concerned. This should be without prejudice to national rules concerning the assessment of evidence by courts or judges, provided that the rights of the defence are respected.
Judicial authorities may take into account, when sentencing, cooperative behaviour of suspects and accused persons.
Right to be present at the trial : the amended text states that it should also be possible to hold a trial which may result in a decision on guilt or innocence in the absence of a suspect or accused person where that person has been informed of the trial and has given a mandate to a lawyer who was- appointed by that person or by the State - to represent him or her at the trial and who represented the suspect or accused person.
Where Member States provide for the possibility of holding trials in the absence of suspects or accused persons but the conditions for taking a decision in the absence of a particular suspect or accused person are not met, for example because the person has fled or absconded, the amended text states that it should nevertheless be possible to take a decision in the absence of the suspect or accused person and to enforce that decision.
In that case, Member States should ensure that when suspects are informed of the decision, in particular when they are apprehended, they should also be informed of the possibility of challenging the decision and of the right to a new trial or to another legal remedy . In case of a new trial , Member States shall ensure that those suspects and accused persons have the right to be present, to participate effectively, in accordance with procedures under national law, and to exercise the rights of the defence.
Remedies: Members stipulated that in the assessment of statements made by suspects or accused persons or of evidence obtained in breach of the right to remain silent or the right not to incriminate oneself, the rights of the defence and the fairness of the proceedings must be respected.
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted the report by Nathalie GRIESBECK (ADLE, FR) on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings.
The committee recommended that Parliament’s position adopted in first reading following the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the Commission proposal as follows:
Scope : Members specified that the Directive should apply to criminal proceedings, as well as similar proceedings of a criminal nature leading to comparable sanctions of a punitive and deterrent nature, such as deprivation of liberty, irrespective of whether or not the proceedings were classified as criminal. Suspects must be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a final decision delivered according to law, in a trial at which they have had all the safeguards necessary for their defence.
Public references to guilt before proven guilty : statements must not reflect an opinion that the person was guilty and be of such a nature as to potentially encourage the public to believe the person was guilty. Public authorities must be prohibited from providing to the media any information concerning ongoing criminal proceedings that might undermine the principle of the presumption of innocence.
In the event of a breach of those requirements, independent investigations must take place on the breach and ensure that the suspect or accused person whose right to the presumption of innocence had been violated had access to an effective remedy.
Suspects must not presented in court or in public in a manner that suggested their guilt , before final conviction.
Burden of proof : Members considered that the reversal of the burden of proof in criminal proceedings was unacceptable. The principle that the burden of proof rested with the prosecution must be left untouched. The burden of proof in establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons is on the prosecution and any doubt is to benefit the suspect or accused person.
Use of force : Members stressed that authorities must not use coercion in order to obtain information from a suspect or an accused person. The Directive must state clearly that the use of physical or psychological violence or threats against suspects or accused persons was banned, on the grounds that it constituted a violation of the right to human dignity and the right to a fair trial.
Right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate : the suspect or accused persons must be informed of their right not to incriminate themselves and not to cooperate, prior to any questioning by public authorities, and prior to the suspect giving testimony in court as well as at the moment of the arrest. Exercise of the right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate shall never be considered as a corroboration of the facts or as a reason in itself to adopt or maintain measures which restrict liberty before the final decision on the issue of guilt is taken.
Nevertheless cooperative behaviour by the suspect or accused person might be taken into account as a mitigating factor, when deciding the actual penalty.
Right to remain silent : the report sets out what constituted in practice the exercise of the right to silence and stated that the exercise of this right must never be considered as a corroboration of the facts, nor as a reason in itself to adopt or maintain measures which restricted liberty before the final decision on the issue of guilt was taken.
Right to be present at one's trial: Members wanted to place strict limits to cases where judgment might be rendered in the absence of the accused. Accordingly, proceedings might be conducted in the absence of the accused person only if:
the accused person, after being duly informed that he or she faced trial, explicitly and unequivocally renounced the right to be present, and only if he or she were represented in the proceedings; if the offence which gave rise to the proceedings was punishable by a fine , and the suspect or accused person must always be present if the offence was punishable by a term of imprisonment.
Right to a new trial : with a view to preserving the right to a fair trial, Members established that examination of new evidence might take place. Where the suspects were not present at the trial, the person concerned had the right to a new trial which allowed a fresh determination of the merits of the case – with the opportunity to secure new evidence and, if appropriate, to call the previous evidence into question through cross-examination.
Vulnerable persons : in the implementation of the Directive the particular needs of vulnerable persons who became suspects or accused persons must be taken into account.
Report: 2 years after the deadline for transposition, the Commission shall submit a report assessing the extent to which the Member States had taken the necessary measures to comply with the Directive.
PURPOSE: to ensure the right to a fair trial by setting out common minimum standards on certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings
PROPOSED ACT: Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.
BACKGROUND: the Stockholm Programme put a strong focus on the strengthening of the rights of individuals in criminal proceedings. The European Council invited the Commission to consider establishing minimum procedural rights for suspects or accused persons, and to address the issue of presumption of innocence , in order to promote better cooperation in that area.
Up to now, three measures have been adopted: Directive 2010/64/EU on the right to interpretation and translation, Directive 2012/13/EU on the right to information and Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings.
The proposal continues this work and is part of a series of measures on criminal justice which includes: (i) a directive on provisional legal aid for suspects or accused persons deprived of liberty and legal aid in European arrest warrant proceedings; (ii) a directive on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings
Moreover, on 14 June 2011, the Commission published a Green Paper on the application of EU criminal justice legislation in the field of detention to reflect on ways to strengthen the application of the principle of mutual recognition in the area of detention, within the limits of the EU's competence.
The principle of presumption of innocence has been developed over the years. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has held that Article 6(2) of the ECHR encompasses three key requirements: (i) the right not to be publicly presented as convicted by public authorities before the final judgment; (ii) the fact that the burden of proof is on prosecution and that any reasonable doubts on guilt should benefit the accused; and (iii) the right of the accused to be informed of the accusation against him.
The right to be present at trial is also an essential right of defence.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT: the Commission’s analysis considers that there exist points in which legal safeguards should be improved with regard to certain aspects the presumption of innocence to strengthen this fundamental right.
CONTENT: the draft directive aims to lay down minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the right of suspects and accused persons to be presumed innocent unless proven guilty by a final judgment.
The proposal covers the following rights:
1) The right not to be presented guilty by public authorities before the final judgment : the ECtHR established as one of the basic aspects of the principle of presumption of innocence the fact that a court or public official may not publicly present the suspects or accused persons as if they were guilty of an offence if they have not been tried and convicted of it by a final judgment.
2) The burden of proof is on prosecution and any reasonable doubts on the guilt should benefit the accused: this presupposes that a court's judgment must be based on evidence as put before it and not on mere allegations or assumptions.
3) The right not to incriminate one-self and not to cooperate and the right to remain silent: these rights lie at the heart of the notion of a fair trial under Article 6 of the ECHR.
· the right not to incriminate oneself presupposes that the prosecution in a criminal case seeks to prove the case against the accused without resort to evidence obtained through methods of coercion or oppression;
· the right to remain silent must be ensured and any inferences drawn from the fact that suspects make use of this right should be excluded .
Suspects should be promptly informed of their right to remain silent. Such information should also refer to the content of the right to remain silent and of the consequences of renouncing to it and of invoking it.
4) Right to be present at one's trial : the proposal lays down this right, established by the ECtHR, of an accused to be present at the trial and also establishes limited exceptions to this right, in line with the Charter, the ECHR and EU law. It provides that Member States must ensure that the right to be present applies to any trial aiming at assessing the question of the guilt of the accused person (both conviction and acquittal decisions).
Non-regression clause : the proposal aims to ensure that setting common minimum standards does not have the effect of lowering standards in certain Member States and that the standards set in the Charter and in the ECHR are maintained.
Documents
- Follow-up document: COM(2021)0144
- Follow-up document: EUR-Lex
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2016)191
- Final act published in Official Journal: Directive 2016/343
- Final act published in Official Journal: OJ L 065 11.03.2016, p. 0001
- Draft final act: 00063/2015/LEX
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading: T8-0011/2016
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading: A8-0133/2015
- Committee opinion: PE546.831
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE546.821
- Committee draft report: PE546.756
- Debate in Council: 3354
- Debate in Council: 3336
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2013)0478
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2013)0479
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2013)0500
- Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
- Legislative proposal published: COM(2013)0821
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2013)0478
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2013)0479
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2013)0500
- Committee draft report: PE546.756
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE546.821
- Committee opinion: PE546.831
- Draft final act: 00063/2015/LEX
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2016)191
- Follow-up document: COM(2021)0144 EUR-Lex
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
- Contribution: COM(2013)0821
Activities
- Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI
Plenary Speeches (3)
- 2016/11/22 Presumption of innocence and right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings (debate) FI
- 2016/11/22 Presumption of innocence and right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings (debate) FI
- 2016/11/22 Presumption of innocence and right to be present at trial in criminal proceedings (debate)
- Nathalie GRIESBECK
- Notis MARIAS
- Tim AKER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Louis ALIOT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jean ARTHUIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marie-Christine ARNAUTU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jonathan ARNOTT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Zigmantas BALČYTIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Hugues BAYET
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Xabier BENITO ZILUAGA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- José BLANCO LÓPEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Louise BOURS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marie-Christine BOUTONNET
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Gianluca BUONANNO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- James CARVER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Nicola CAPUTO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Salvatore CICU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- David COBURN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Alberto CIRIO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jane COLLINS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Therese COMODINI CACHIA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Pál CSÁKY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Javier COUSO PERMUY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Daniel DALTON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Michel DANTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Isabella DE MONTE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Nirj DEVA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mireille D'ORNANO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Norbert ERDŐS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Georgios EPITIDEIOS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Edouard FERRAND
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mariya GABRIEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ildikó GÁLL-PELCZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Francisco de Paula GAMBUS MILLET
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Elisabetta GARDINI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Arne GERICKE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Takis HADJIGEORGIOU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Brian HAYES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marian HARKIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mike HOOKEM
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ian HUDGHTON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Cătălin Sorin IVAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Diane JAMES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Petr JEŽEK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marc JOULAUD
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivan JAKOVČIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Philippe JUVIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Barbara KAPPEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Afzal KHAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Béla KOVÁCS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Patrick LE HYARIC
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marine LE PEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Vladimír MAŇKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivana MALETIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Andrejs MAMIKINS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jiří MAŠTÁLKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Dominique MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Barbara MATERA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- David MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jean-Luc MÉLENCHON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Miroslav MIKOLÁŠIK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Louis MICHEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bernard MONOT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marlene MIZZI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Sophie MONTEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Krisztina MORVAI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Alessia Maria MOSCA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Renaud MUSELIER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- József NAGY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Franz OBERMAYR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Margot PARKER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Florian PHILIPPOT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marijana PETIR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Andrej PLENKOVIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Salvatore Domenico POGLIESE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Franck PROUST
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Julia REID
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Sofia RIBEIRO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Liliana RODRIGUES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Claude ROLIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Fernando RUAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Lola SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ricardo SERRÃO SANTOS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jill SEYMOUR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Maria Lidia SENRA RODRÍGUEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Siôn SIMON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Monika SMOLKOVÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Davor ŠKRLEC
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Igor ŠOLTES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Catherine STIHLER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Beatrix von STORCH
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Patricija ŠULIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Eleftherios SYNADINOS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Adam SZEJNFELD
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Claudia ȚAPARDEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Isabelle THOMAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Pavel TELIČKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mylène TROSZCZYNSKI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ángela VALLINA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marie-Christine VERGIAT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Miguel VIEGAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Dame Glenis WILLMOTT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Pablo ZALBA BIDEGAIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Inês Cristina ZUBER
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A8-0133/2015 - Nathalie Griesbeck - Résolution législative #
Amendments | Dossier |
282 |
2013/0407(COD)
2014/03/25
JURI
16 amendments...
Amendment 24 #
Proposal for a directive Citation 1 a (new) - having regard to Article 11 of the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
Amendment 25 #
Proposal for a directive Citation 1 b (new) - having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in particular Article 48 thereof on the presumption of innocence and right of defence,
Amendment 26 #
Proposal for a directive Citation 1 c (new) - having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, known as the European Convention on Human Rights,
Amendment 27 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) The purpose of this Directive is to enhance the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings by laying down minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at the trial, and to ensure that a common and sufficiently high level of protection and the procedural safeguards linked thereto are available to suspects and accused persons throughout the EU, without prejudice to the higher protection standards which may be in use in a given Member State.
Amendment 28 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 29 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The right to a fair trial is one of the basic principles in a democratic society. The right of an accused person to be present at the trial is based on th
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which they have had all the guarantees necessary for their defence.
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Any doubt shall benefit natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings.
Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right not to incriminate themselves
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 (4) Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 (4) Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3а. Provided that the conditions laid down in Article 8 are duly met, Member States shall be completely free to make use of simplified procedures in criminal proceedings concerning minor offences.
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. A minor offence within the meaning of Article 8(3)(a) means any offence under national law punishable by a custodial sentence of a maximum period of one year or by another, lighter, penalty under the law of the Member State in which the criminal proceedings are being conducted.
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Any use of force not necessary to secure the person of the accused shall be severely punished.
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new) This Directive shall not have the effect of modifying, or introducing additional guarantees concerning, the obligation to respect fundamental rights and legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the TEU, including the rights of persons subject to criminal proceedings, and any obligations incumbent on public authorities in this respect shall remain unaffected.
source: PE-532.333
2015/03/02
JURI
86 amendments...
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4а. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons do not bear criminal responsibility for giving untrue explanations at any stage of the criminal proceedings.
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part 2. Member States may provide for a possibility under which the trial court may decide on
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i (i) either was summoned in person and thereby informed, by means of a summons, of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with the trial, or by other means actually received official information of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii (ii) was informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she does not appear for the trial;
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) being aware of the scheduled trial, had given a mandate to a legal counsellor, who was either appointed by the person concerned
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part 3.
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b (b) does not request a retrial or lodge an appeal within
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 Member States shall ensure that where the suspects or accused persons were not present at the trial referred to in Article 8(1) and the conditions laid down in Article 8(2) and (3) are not met, the person concerned has the right to a new trial at which they have the right to be present and which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case, including examination of new evidence, and which may lead to the original decision to be reversed.
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 Member States shall ensure that where the suspects or accused persons were not present at the trial referred to in Article 8(1) and the conditions laid down in Article 8(2) and (3) are not met, the person concerned has the right to request a new trial or an appeal, at which they have the right to be present and which will allow
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new) Member States shall ensure the right to a review of the decision establishing the criminal responsibility of the accused person in the event of new evidence coming to light by virtue of which the decision would have been more favourable to the person concerned, or in the event of its being demonstrated that the conviction was due to judicial error.
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Member States shall adopt measures to provide equitable compensation for damages in the event of the right to the presumption of innocence being violated.
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new) Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Following the publication of this Directive and after its entry into force, the Member States are invited, within a year, to harmonise their legislation – the forms and methods, and the procedural requirements that are applied – to achieve the results specified as regards the right of suspects or accused persons to be presumed innocent.
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. The European Public Prosecutor's Office is invited, through a newly created internal body whose purpose is to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive, to identify and collect data with regard to the exercise of and respect for the rights set out in this Directive, in all the Member States.
Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new) This Directive shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to uphold the fundamental rights and legal principles enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union, including the rights of persons who are subject to criminal proceedings. Any other national, regional or international obligation incumbent on public authorities in this respect shall remain unaffected.
Amendment 30 #
Proposal for a directive Recital -1 (new) (-1) Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights enshrine the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial.
Amendment 31 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) The purpose of this Directive is to enhance the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings by laying down minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at the trial, in order to ensure that suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings in the Member States enjoy a high level of protection and procedural safeguards apply in full.
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1a) Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (the UDHR) adopted by the United Nations, Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the ICCPR), Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the ECHR), and the Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) enshrine the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to fair trial.
Amendment 33 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 b (new) (1b) Pursuant to Article 82(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), 'judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgements ad judicial decisions...' while mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters presupposes trust in each other's criminal justice system of the Member States.
Amendment 34 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) The principle of mutual recognition of sentences and other decisions of the judicial authorities is the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in civil and criminal matters within the Union. By establishing minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of suspects or accused persons, this Directive s
Amendment 35 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) By establishing minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of suspects or accused persons, this Directive should strengthen the trust of Member States in the criminal justice systems of other Member States and can thus help to facilitate mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters. Such common minimum rules
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4) In the Stockholm Programme the European Council invited the Commission to examine further elements of minimum procedural rights for suspects or accused persons, and to assess whether other issues, for instance the presumption of innocence, need to be addressed, in order to promote better cooperation in that area between the Member State authorities responsible.
Amendment 37 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) This Directive should apply only to criminal proceedings
Amendment 38 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) This Directive should
Amendment 39 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 7 (7) This Directive should facilitate the practical application of the right to be presumed innocent and all its different aspects and also of the right to be present at one's trial, with a view to safeguarding the right to a fair trial, with due regard for the adversarial principle and balance between the rights of the parties.
Amendment 40 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) This Directive should apply to natural persons who are suspected or accused of
Amendment 41 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 a (new) (10a) However, if the infringement explicitly defined in law is based on the fact that it has been committed by a natural person who occupies a representative, management or directorial post in a company and if it is demonstrated by the company that the culprit acted fraudulently, criminal proceedings may be brought against the latter.
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 a (new) (11a) Article 14(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) states that everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
Amendment 44 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused’s having previously been proved guilty according to law, a judicial decision or a public statement by judicial or other public authorities presents the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted. For the purposes of this Directive, 'public statement' means any statement relating to a crime and issued by the judicial authorities, the police or any other public authorities, including ministers and other public officials. Without prejudice to the freedom of the press and the right to information, the presumption of innocence is also infringed wherever suspects or accused persons are referred to in the press as if they have already been convicted.
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused’s having previously been proved guilty according to law, a judicial decision or a public statement by judicial or other public authorities presents the suspects or accused persons as if they were
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is violated if
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) The burden of proof is on the prosecution
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The right not to incriminate oneself and
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) Any compulsion
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17)
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) Any compulsion used
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate should not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which may be obtained from the suspect or accused person through the use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will of the suspects or accused persons, such as material acquired pursuant to a warrant, material in respect of which there is a legal obligation of retention and production upon request, breath, blood and urine samples and bodily tissue for the purpose of DNA testing, taking into consideration, however, that such methods might be unlawful if inadmissible intrusive medical practices were employed to obtain evidence that could be used against the suspect or accused person.
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) The right to remain silent is an important aspect of the presumption of innocence. It should serve as protection from self-incrimination. The right to remain silent cannot under any circumstances be used against the accused or suspected person and cannot be regarded as substantiating the charges.
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate and the right to remain silent should apply as regards questions material to the offence that someone is suspected or accused of having committed
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 a (new) (23a) However, any person who is named as the subject of a complaint, denunciation or accusation by a victim during an investigation, whom there are grounds for suspecting of possibly having committed an offence and who has not been placed under judicial investigation, must be heard if the suspect so requests.
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 24 a (new) (24a) Within one year after the entry into force of this Directive, Member States are invited to harmonise legislation - formalities, methods and procedural requirements - with a view to obtaining specific results regarding the right of a suspect or accused person to be presumed innocent.
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 (26) The principle of effectiveness of Union law requires that Member States put in place adequate and effective remedies in the event of a breach of a right conferred upon individuals by Union law. The measures should be embodied in the national law of each Member State and should preferably apply uniformly throughout the Union. An effective remedy available in the event of a breach of any of the principles laid down in this Directive should have, as far as possible, the effect of placing the suspects or accused persons in the same position in which they would have found themselves had the breach not occurred.
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 a (new) (26a) Infringement of provisions regarding presumption of innocence and the right of those concerned to attend their trial should lead to remedies such as: 1. Resumption of trial from the initial stages where necessary, ensuring compliance with minimum requirements and all the rights set out in this Directive: the right not to be presented as guilty by the authorities before final judgment, ensuring that the burden of proof rests with the prosecution and that the accused are given the benefit of any reasonable doubt as to their guilt, the right of those concerned not to incriminate themselves, the right to refuse cooperation, the right to remain silent and the right of those concerned to be present at their trial; 2. Resumption of trial from the stage at which the rules and rights set out in this Directive were infringed. Under the phased transition to Union law, future decisions regarding criminal proceedings within the remit of the European Public Prosecutor's Office may be (subsequently) reviewed in the light of national statute law and case law which, in certain Member States, may be much more restrictive than the minimum standards imposed under this Directive.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) In order to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive,
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 a (new) (27a) Vulnerable persons should be given a specific degree of protection, therefore, in respect of some of the rights foreseen in this Directive, additional procedural safeguards should be applicable. In relation to children the additional procedural safeguards set out in the Directive on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings must apply.
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a (a)
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings, even before being informed by the Member State authorities, through official notification or any other means of the fact that they are suspected or accused of having committed an offence and until the final conclusion of those proceedings
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings until the final conclusion of those proceedings or until proceedings have been definitively wound up by the criminal investigation authorities or a final judgment handed down by the courts, as the case may be.
Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings until
Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States shall take the steps necessary to ensure that, before a final conviction, public statements and official decisions from public authorities do not refer to the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted.
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that, before a final conviction, p
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are taken in the event of a breach of th
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are taken in the event of a breach of that requirement, including the liquidation of compensation and a retrial.
Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the burden of proof in establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons is on the prosecution. This is without prejudice to any ex officio fact finding powers of the trial court. Member States shall also ensure that suspects or accused persons have the benefit of any doubt. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons always have the opportunity to submit evidence for the defence or to conduct investigations for the defence through their lawyer.
Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the burden of proof in establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons is on the prosecution. Where a civil action is pursued during the criminal trial, the burden of proof shall be on the civil party, except in cases where the victim does not have capacity. This is without prejudice to any ex officio fact finding powers of the trial court.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall ensure that, where
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right not to incriminate themselves
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. However, any person who is named as the subject of a complaint, denunciation or accusation by a victim during an investigation, whom there are grounds for suspecting of possibly having committed an offence and who has not been placed under judicial investigation, must be heard if the suspect so requests.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 2. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Member States should nevertheless also consider that such methods could be unlawful where, by using non-accepted intrusive medical procedures, elements of a testimonial nature could be obtained that could incriminate the suspect or accused person, before a final irrevocable judgment.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right not to incriminate oneself
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible,
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. In order to maintain the right balance between the principle of the presumption of innocence and freedom of the press, Member States shall ensure that journalists are at all times protected as regards their right to protect the confidentiality of their sources.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right, throughout the criminal proceedings, to remain silent when questioned, by the police or other law enforcement or judicial authorities, in relation to the offence that they are suspected or accused of having committed.
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall promptly inform the suspect or accused persons, through the competent bodies, of their right to remain silent, and explain the
Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall promptly inform the suspect or accused persons, in a language which they understand, of their right to remain silent, and shall explain the content of this right and the consequences of renouncing or invoking it.
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a later stage in the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of facts or used to establish the punishment, even implicitly.
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
source: 549.446
2015/03/06
LIBE
180 amendments...
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 a (new) (17a) The degree of compulsion imposed on suspects or accused persons with a view to compelling them to provide information relating to charges against them should not destroy the very essence of their right not to incriminate one-self and their right to remain silent, even for reasons of security and public order.
Amendment 101 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate should not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which may be legitimately obtained from the suspect or accused person through the proper use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will of the
Amendment 103 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate should not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which may be obtained from the suspect or accused person through the use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will of the suspects or accused persons
Amendment 104 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 18 (18) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate should not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which may be obtained from the suspect or accused person through the use of lawful compulsory powers
Amendment 105 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 (19) The right to remain silent is an important aspect of the presumption of innocence. It should serve as protection from self-incrimination. The right to remain silent cannot in any circumstances be used against the accused or suspected person and cannot be regarded as substantiation of the charges.
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 19 a (new) (19a) Possible violations of the right to silence or not to incriminate oneself should be assessed by reference to all relevant factors including the use of physical compulsion, compliance with the notification obligations under Directive 2012/13/EU and the authorities' reference to possible pre-trial detention to discourage the exercise of the right to silence.
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 (20) The right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate and the right to remain silent should apply as regards questions material to the offence that someone is - or could be in the light of their own utterances- suspected or accused of having committed and not, for example, as regards questions relating to the personal identification of a suspect or accused person.
Amendment 108 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 a (new) (20a) The non-admissibility of any evidence obtained in the breach of the right not to incriminate oneself and not to cooperate and the right to remain silent should also extend to evidence collected in proceedings which are not formally criminal proceedings but which might lead to a criminal sanction being imposed.
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 a (new) (20a) Any evidence obtained in violation of the right not to incriminate oneself and to refuse to cooperate and in violation of the right to remain silent, as laid down in this Directive, should be declared inadmissible. The use in criminal proceedings of statements or evidence obtained in violation of these rights automatically renders the proceedings as a whole unfair.
Amendment 110 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 20 a (new) (20a) In Member States in which an offender can act as a witness for the state and be granted impunity in exchange for testifying against accomplices, that system may be distorted and used to make false accusations. Efforts should therefore be made to ensure that the evidence of a state’s witness is not relied upon uncritically, but that corroborating evidence is obtained. The testimony of a state’s witness should be a trail leading to other evidence, not the sole evidence in the case.
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 21 (21) The right to a fair trial is one of the basic principles in a democratic society, as enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The right of an accused person to be present at the trial is based on that right and should be guaranteed throughout the Union.
Amendment 112 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) However,
Amendment 113 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 22 (22) However, the right of the accused person to be present at the trial is not absolute. Under certain conditions the accused person may, expressly
Amendment 114 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 Amendment 115 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 23 a (new) (23a) Where a suspect or accused person is prevented from being present at the trial for reasons beyond his or her control or in instances of force majeure, that suspect or accused person should always have the right to a re-trial.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 (26) The principle of effectiveness of Union law requires that Member States put in place adequate and effective remedies in the event of a breach of a right conferred upon individuals by Union law, including a right to appeal. An effective remedy available in the event of a breach of any of the principles laid down in this Directive should have
Amendment 117 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 26 (26) The principle of effectiveness of Union law requires that Member States put in place adequate and effective remedies in the event of a breach of a right conferred upon individuals by Union law. An effective remedy available in the event of a breach of any of the principles laid down in this Directive should
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 Amendment 119 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 (27) In order to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of this Directive, Member States
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 a (new) (27 a) Children who are the most vulnerable should be given a specific degree of protection, therefore, in respect of some of the rights foreseen in this Directive, additional procedural safeguards should be applicable, set out in the Directive on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings.
Amendment 122 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 27 a (new) (27a) Vulnerable persons should be given a specific degree of protection, therefore, in respect of some of the rights foreseen in this Directive, additional procedural safeguards should be applicable. In relation to children the additional procedural safeguards set out in the Directive (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council [on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings]34a should apply. ______________ 34aDirective (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council of ...[on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings].
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 (29) As this Directive establishes minimum rules, Member States may extend the rights set out in this Directive in order to provide a higher level of protection.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 29 a (new) (29a) The transposition of this Directive should contribute to the creation of an Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within the Union, whose overarching value is the respect of fundamental rights. Consequently, if there are substantial grounds for believing that this Directive may have the effect of modifying the obligation incumbent on public authorities to respect the fundamental rights and legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union, including the rights of persons subject to criminal proceedings, such obligations should remain unaffected.
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a (a) certain aspects of the right to the presumption of innocence and the right to remain silent in criminal proceedings;
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons and legal persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings
Amendment 127 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings from the moment a person becomes suspect or accused until the final conclusion of those proceedings.
Amendment 128 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings, from the time they become suspects or accused persons until the final conclusion of those proceedings.
Amendment 131 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 This Directive applies to natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings until
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new) In cases in which the law of a Member State provides that an authority other than a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters may impose penalties in relation to relatively minor offences and there is a right of appeal against the imposition of such penalties with a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters, Articles 5 to 9 of this Directive shall apply only in so far as the matter is referred to a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters following the lodging of an appeal.
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law, with a final decision.
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive Article 3 Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are presumed innocent until proven guilty
Amendment 136 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – title Public references to guilt before
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that, before a final conviction or after a final acquittal, public statements
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States
Amendment 139 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure that, before a final conviction, public statements and official decisions from public authorities do not refer to the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted.
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that, before a final conviction, public statements and official decisions from public authorities do not refer to the suspects or accused persons as if they were
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that, before a final conviction, public statements and official decisions from public authorities do not refer to the suspects or accused persons as if the
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that, before a final conviction, p
Amendment 144 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new) Member States shall ensure that their interior or justice ministries do not leak internal investigations to the media, undermining the right of the accused person.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new) Member States shall furthermore ensure that suspects or accused persons are not presented in court or in public in a manner suggesting their guilt before the final conviction.
Amendment 146 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are taken in the event of a breach of that requirement and shall conduct independent investigations on the breach.
Amendment 147 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are taken in the event of a breach of that requirement, including the liquidation of compensation and a retrial.
Amendment 149 #
Proposal for a directive Article 4 a (new) Article 4a Presentation of suspects or accused persons 1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons are not presented in court or to the media in ways that suggest their guilt, including in particular in prison clothing, handcuffs or the use of enclosures. 2. Paragraph 1 shall not prevent a Member State from applying measures which are genuinely required for case- specific security reasons, on the basis of specific identified risks posed by the individual suspected or accused person.
Amendment 150 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the burden of proof in establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons is on the prosecution. This is without prejudice to any ex officio fact finding powers of the trial court. Member States shall also ensure that suspects or accused persons have the benefit of any doubt. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons always have the opportunity to submit evidence for the defence or to conduct investigations for the defence through their lawyer.
Amendment 151 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the
Amendment 152 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that the burden of proof in establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons is on the prosecution
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 Amendment 155 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 Amendment 157 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 2. Member States
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Member States shall ensure that, where the trial court ma
Amendment 159 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 3. Any doubt shall benefit natural persons suspected or accused in criminal proceedings. Member States shall ensure that where the trial court makes an assessment as to the guilt of a suspect or accused person and there is reasonable doubt as to the guilt of that person, the person concerned shall be acquitted.
Amendment 160 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 Amendment 161 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Member States in which an offender can act as a state’s witness shall ensure that when establishing the guilt of suspects or accused persons the testimony of any such state’s witness does not constitute the sole prosecution evidence and that it is supported by other evidence.
Amendment 162 #
Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Member States shall ensure that in cases involving serious offences attracting severe penalties, the accused and the most important witnesses are heard at least once by an independent court or an investigating judge.
Amendment 163 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right not to incriminate themselves
Amendment 164 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 1. Member States shall ensure that suspects or accused persons have the right not to incriminate themselves
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. "Law enforcement or judicial authorities" refer to public authorities which, according to national law, exercise powers in the realm of criminal proceedings.
Amendment 166 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Member States shall promptly inform the suspect or accused persons of their right not to incriminate themselves and not to cooperate, and explain the content of this right and the consequences of renouncing or invoking it. This shall be done prior to any questioning by public authorities, prior to the suspect or accused person giving testimony in court as well as at the moment of the arrest.
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 2. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which
Amendment 168 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 2. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which
Amendment 169 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 2. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of material which may be obtained from the suspects or accused persons through the proven use of lawful compulsory powers but which has an existence independent of the will of the suspects or accused persons.
Amendment 170 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2 2. The right referred to in paragraph 1 shall not extend to the use in criminal proceedings of
Amendment 171 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right not to incriminate oneself
Amendment 172 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new) Member States may nevertheless allow for the cooperative behaviour of the suspect or accused person to be taken into account as a mitigating factor when deciding the concrete penalty to impose.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right not to incriminate oneself or of the right not to cooperate shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a later stage of the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of facts or as a reason in itself to adopt or maintain measures which restrict liberty before the final decision on the issue of guilt is taken.
Amendment 174 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right not to incriminate oneself
Amendment 175 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Evidence based on the explanations of an accused person who has pleaded guilty should not be treated as decisive proof of guilt if it is not supported by other evidence, in particular in proceedings where the accused pleaded guilty during the investigation and then withdrew that plea in court.
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 178 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new) Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall promptly inform the suspect or accused persons of their right to remain silent, and explain the content of this right and the consequences of renouncing or invoking it. This shall be done prior to any questioning by public authorities, prior to the suspect or accused person giving testimony in court as well as at the moment of the arrest.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall promptly inform
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 2. Member States shall promptly inform the suspect or accused persons of their right to remain silent, and explain the content of this right and the legal consequences of renouncing or invoking it. This information must, however, be provided before any questioning begins.
Amendment 185 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. The right to silence shall immediately be recognised and communicated to any person who, without having previously been a suspect or accused person, makes statements to the police or to other law enforcement or judicial authorities from which indications of his or her guilt emerge. If such a person were to have been heard, from the outset, as a suspect or accused person, his or her statements cannot be used.
Amendment 186 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a later stage in the proceedings and shall not be considered as
Amendment 187 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person at a later stage in the proceedings and shall not be considered as a corroboration of facts
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 3 3. Exercise of the right to remain silent shall not be used against a suspect or accused person a
Amendment 190 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 4. Any evidence obtained in breach of this Article shall not be admissible
Amendment 194 #
Proposal for a directive Article 7 – paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. In order to facilitate the effective protection of the right to remain silent, Member States shall ensure that questioning of suspects and accused persons is audio-visually recorded.
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part 2. Member States may provide for a possibility under which the trial court may decide on
Amendment 196 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part 2. Member States may provide for a possibility under which the trial court may decide on the guilt in the absence of the suspect or the accused person
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – introductory part 2. Member States may provide for a possibility under which the trial court may decide on the guilt in the absence of the suspect or the accused person, only if the offence which gave rise to the proceedings is punishable by a fine, and under no circumstances if the offence is punishable by a term of imprisonment, provided that the suspect or accused person:
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – introductory part a) in due time, which may not in any case be fixed at less than 10 days:
Amendment 199 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i (i) either was summoned in person and thereby informed of the
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i i) either was summoned in person and thereby informed, by means of a summons, of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with the trial, or by other means actually received official information of the scheduled date and place of any hearing connected with that trial in such a manner that it was unequivocally established that he or she was aware
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i (i)
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i (i)
Amendment 203 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii (ii) was informed of the consequences of an unjustified non-appearance and that a decision may be handed down if he or she does not appear for the trial; or
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii ii) was informed that a decision may be handed down if he or she does not appear for the trial;
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b (b) being aware of the
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b b) being aware of the scheduled trial, had given a mandate to a legal counsellor, who was either appointed by the person concerned
Amendment 208 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Suspects or accused persons shall always have the right to request a new trial or a new date for a trial if, for reasons beyond their control, they were unable to be present.
Amendment 209 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part 3.
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 – introductory part Amendment 212 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point a Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 – point b b) does not request a retrial or appeal within a reasonable time frame under the provisions of national laws.
Amendment 214 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new) (3a) Member States may provide that the competent court may exclude the suspect or accused from the proceedings after a warning, temporarily or for the entire duration of the proceedings, if this occurs in the interests of ensuring the smooth conduct or the orderliness of the criminal proceedings in so far as the rights of the defence are not thereby violated.
Amendment 215 #
Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 3 b (new) (3b) The provisions of this Article shall not apply if, in accordance with the provisions of national procedural law, legal proceedings or parts thereof are conducted in writing, providing this occurs with due respect for the principle of a fair trial.
Amendment 216 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new) Member States shall ensure the right to a review of the decision establishing the criminal responsibility of the accused person in the event of new evidence coming to light by virtue of which the decision would have been more favourable to the person concerned, or in the event of its being demonstrated that the conviction was due to judicial error.
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 Member States shall ensure that where the suspects or accused persons were not present at the trial referred to in Article 8(1) and the conditions laid down in Article 8(2) and (3) are not met, the person concerned has the right to a new trial at which they have the right to be present and which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a directive Article 9 Member States shall ensure that where the suspects or accused persons were not present at the trial referred to in Article 8(1) and the conditions laid down in Article 8(2) and (3) are not met, the person
Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Member States shall adopt measures to provide equitable compensation for damages in the event of the right to the presumption of innocence being violated.
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 2 2. The remedy shall
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Evidence collected in administrative proceedings, where such collection would have infringed the terms of this Directive had the proceedings been criminal, shall not be admissible as evidence in criminal proceedings covered by this Directive.
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 1 Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a directive Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new) This Directive shall not have the effect of modifying the obligation to respect the fundamental rights and legal principles as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union, including the rights of persons subject to criminal proceedings, and any obligations incumbent on public authorities in this respect shall remain unaffected.
Amendment 224 #
Proposal for a directive Article 11 Amendment 45 #
Proposal for a directive Recital -1 (new) (-1) Pursuant to Article 82(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), 'judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgements ad judicial decisions...' while mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters presupposes trust in each other's criminal justice system of the Member States.
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a directive Recital -1 a (new) (-1 a) Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (the UDHR) adopted by the United Nations, Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the ICCPR), Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the ECHR), and the Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) enshrine the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to fair trial.
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a directive Recital -1 (new) (-1) Article 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union stipulates that everyone who has been charged shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law; respect for the rights of the defence of anyone who has been charged shall be guaranteed. Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms protects the right to a fair trial, which implies that everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law and has a right to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his choosing. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that everyone charged with a criminal offence shall have the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law and the right to be tried in his presence, and to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing.
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a directive Recital -1 (new) (- 1) The principle of presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial are enshrined in Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Amendment 49 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) The purpose of this Directive is to enhance the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings by laying down minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at the trial, so as to ensure that suspected and accused persons in criminal proceedings in the Member States receive a high level of protection with full respect for procedural guarantees.
Amendment 50 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 (1) The purpose of this Directive is to enhance the right to a fair trial in criminal proceedings by laying down minimum rules concerning certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and the right to be present at the trial, and to ensure that a common and sufficiently high level of protection and the procedural safeguards linked thereto are available to suspects and accused persons throughout the EU, without prejudice to the higher protection standards which may be in use in a given Member State.
Amendment 51 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 a (new) (1a) Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (the UDHR) adopted by the United Nations, Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the ICCPR), Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the ECHR), and the Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) enshrine the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to fair trial.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 1 b (new) (1b) Pursuant to Article 82(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Union shall be based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgements and judicial decisions while mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters presupposes trust in each other's criminal justice system of the Member States.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) The principle of mutual recognition of judgments and other decisions made by judicial authorities is the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters within the Union. By establishing minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of suspects or accused persons, this Directive s
Amendment 54 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) By establishing minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of suspects or accused persons, this Directive should strengthen the trust of Member States in the criminal justice systems of other Member States and can thus help to facilitate mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters. Such common minimum rules
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 (2) By establishing minimum rules on the protection of procedural rights of suspects or accused persons, this Directive should strengthen the trust of Member States in the criminal justice systems of other Member States and can thus help to facilitate mutual recognition of decisions in criminal matters. Such common minimum rules
Amendment 56 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 2 a (new) (2a) Although the Member States are parties to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, experience has shown that this in itself does not always provide a sufficient degree of trust in the criminal justice systems of other Member States.
Amendment 57 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 3 (3)
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 4 (4)
Amendment 59 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) This Directive should apply only to criminal proceedings
Amendment 60 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) This Directive should apply
Amendment 61 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) This Directive should apply only to criminal proceedings
Amendment 62 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 (6) This Directive should apply only to criminal proceedings. Proceedings for minor offences are not covered by this Directive, unless they are conducted before a court having jurisdiction in criminal matters. Administrative proceedings leading to sanctions such as competition, trade, tax, financial services proceedings and other investigations by administrative authorities in relation to these proceedings, and also civil proceedings are not covered by this Directive.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new) (6a) The safeguards provided for by this Directive should therefore apply in all proceedings in which restrictive measures, including deprivation of liberty, are liable to be imposed as a punishment and to proceedings liable to give rise to a criminal record. At all events, application of the Directive should not be prevented by the fact that the proceedings were not initiated in response to acts regarded as criminal offences under national law, that they are not taking place before a criminal court and that they will not lead to the imposition of criminal penalties under national law.
Amendment 64 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) This Directive should apply to natural persons and legal persons who are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence. It should apply at any stage of the proceedings,
Amendment 65 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) This Directive should apply to natural persons who are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence. It should apply at any stage of the proceedings, even before those persons are made aware by the competent authorities of a Member State, by official notification or otherwise, that they are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, until the conclusion of such proceedings with a sentence being handed down.
Amendment 66 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) This Directive should apply to natural and legal persons who are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence. It should apply at any stage of the proceedings, even before those persons are made aware by the competent authorities of a Member State, by official notification or otherwise, that they are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence, until the conclusion of such proceedings.
Amendment 67 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 8 (8) This Directive should apply to natural persons who are suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence. It should apply at any stage of the
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 Amendment 69 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 Amendment 70 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) This Directive acknowledges the different needs and levels of protection of certain aspects of the right to be presumed innocent as regards natural persons and legal persons.
Amendment 71 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) This Directive acknowledges the different needs and levels of protection of certain aspects of the right to be presumed innocent as regards natural persons and legal persons. Such protection as regards natural persons is reflected in abundant case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
Amendment 72 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 9 (9) This Directive acknowledges the different needs and levels of protection of certain aspects of the right to be presumed innocent as regards natural persons and legal persons.
Amendment 73 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 (10) The Court of Justice of the European Union has, however, recognised that the rights flowing from the presumption of innocence do not accrue to legal persons in the same way as to natural persons. In the current state of development of national legislations and of case law at national level and at the level of the Court of Justice it is premature to legislate at Union level on the right to be presumed innocent of legal persons. Protection of the right of legal persons to be presumed innocent should be ensured by the existing legislative safeguards and case law, the evolution of which in the future should determine an assessment of the need for Union action.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 10 a (new) (10a) Member States' governments should not leak false information to the media in order to politically attack a person and undermine its right to be presumed innocent.
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 Amendment 77 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 Amendment 78 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 11 a (new) (11a) If a person other than a suspect or accused person, for example a witness, becomes a suspect or accused person, that person's right to the presumption of innocence and his or her right not to incriminate him or herself should be protected, and he or she should have the right to remain silent, as confirmed by the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. This Directive therefore makes express reference to the practical situation where such a person becomes a suspect or accused person during questioning by the police or by another law enforcement authority in the context of criminal proceedings. Where, in the course of such questioning, a person other than a suspect or accused person becomes a suspect or accused person, questioning should be suspended immediately. However, it should be possible to continue the questioning if the person concerned has been informed that he or she is a suspect or accused person and of his or her procedural rights in accordance with Directive 2012/13/EU. Evidence collected prior to the notification of rights should not be admissible during the criminal proceedings which follow.
Amendment 79 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 Amendment 80 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 Amendment 81 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 12 (12) "Law enforcement or judicial authorities" for the purposes of this Directive refers to public authorities which
Amendment 82 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused’s having previously been proved guilty according to law, a judicial decision or a public statement by judicial or other public authorities presents the suspects or accused persons as if they were convicted. For the purposes of this Directive, 'public statements' means any statement relating to a crime and issued by the judicial authorities, police and any other public authorities, including ministers and other public officials. Without prejudice to the freedom of the press and the right to information, presumption of innocence is also infringed wherever suspects or accused persons are referred to in the press as if they have already been convicted.
Amendment 83 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused’s having
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused
Amendment 85 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 (13) The presumption of innocence is violated if, without the accused
Amendment 87 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 a (new) (13a) For the purposes of this Directive, the term 'public statement' should mean any official, unofficial or informal statement which contains information about ongoing proceedings concerning a criminal offence. This includes statements about related subsequent proceedings, which were concluded by a final acquittal of the suspect or accused person, and statements in court during the pre-trial period. The term should also cover interviews and communications issued through or in conjunction with the media as well as leaking information to the press which could create prejudice or bias against the suspect or accused person before final conviction in court. The latter is without prejudice to freedom of the press.
Amendment 88 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 b (new) (13b) For the purposes of this Directive, the term 'public authorities' should be interpreted broadly and should be understood to designate not only the judicial and police authorities involved in the proceedings and any other judicial, police or law enforcement authority, but also any other public authority of any kind, including State representatives, employees or agents.
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 c (new) (13c) Member States should take the necessary measures to protect against public declarations of guilt before conviction by putting in place adequate contempt of court regulations, to ensure that journalists and media are not able to prejudice proceedings, and should promote the adoption of codes of ethical practice in cooperation with the media. Member States should furthermore conduct independent investigations of any leaks from criminal proceedings to the public.
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 13 d (new) (13d) In order to properly protect suspects or accused persons from public pronouncements of guilt before final conviction, Member States should also ensure that the appearance or presentation of the suspect or accused person in the courtroom before and during the trial is appropriate, since presentation in the media of suspects or accused persons in glass boxes, partitioned or in handcuffs, leg irons or prison clothes tends to create an impression of guilt from the outset.
Amendment 91 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 (14) The burden of proof is on the prosecution
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 14 a (new) (14a) In various Member States not only the prosecution but also judges and competent courts are charged with seeking both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence. Member States who do not have an adversarial system may maintain their current system provided that it complies with this Directive and with other relevant European and international law.
Amendment 93 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 15 Amendment 95 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 16 (16) The right not to incriminate oneself and
Amendment 96 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) Any compulsion used to compel the suspect or accused person to provide information should be
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17)
Amendment 99 #
Proposal for a directive Recital 17 (17) Any compulsion used to compel the suspect or accused person to provide information should be limited. To determine whether the compulsion did not
source: 546.821
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/3/rapporteur |
|
docs/3/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-PR-546756_EN.html
|
docs/4/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AM-546821_EN.html
|
docs/5/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AD-546831_EN.html
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/10 |
|
docs/10 |
|
docs/11 |
|
docs/11 |
|
docs/12 |
|
docs/12 |
|
docs/13 |
|
docs/13 |
|
events/8/docs |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
docs/3/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE546.756
|
docs/4/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE546.821
|
docs/5/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE546.831&secondRef=02
|
docs/8 |
|
events/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading |
events/3/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading |
events/5/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading |
events/7 |
|
events/7 |
|
events/8/docs |
|
events/10 |
|
events/10 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
docs/7/body |
EC
|
events/7/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0133&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2015-0133_EN.html |
events/10/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0011New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0011_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
council |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
other |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
LIBE/8/00267New
|
procedure/final/url |
Old
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016L0343New
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=32016L0343 |
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/13 |
|
procedure/final |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official JournalNew
Procedure completed |
activities/12 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting signature of actNew
Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official Journal |
activities/10 |
|
activities/11 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Provisional agreement between Parliament and Council on final actNew
Awaiting signature of act |
activities/9/docs/0/text |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Council 1st reading position / budgetary conciliation convocationNew
Provisional agreement between Parliament and Council on final act |
activities/8/docs |
|
activities/8/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/9/docs |
|
activities/9/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Awaiting Council 1st reading position / budgetary conciliation convocation |
activities/8/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
activities/9 |
|
activities/8/date |
Old
2016-02-02T00:00:00New
2016-01-19T00:00:00 |
activities/8/date |
Old
2016-03-08T00:00:00New
2016-02-02T00:00:00 |
activities/8 |
|
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52013PC0821:EN
|
activities/5 |
|
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52013PC0821:EN
|
activities/6/docs/0/text |
|
links/European Commission/title |
Old
PreLexNew
EUR-Lex |
procedure/subject/0 |
Old
1.10 Fundamental rights in the Union, CharterNew
1.10 Fundamental rights in the EU, Charter |
activities/6/docs |
|
activities/6 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
activities/5 |
|
activities/4 |
|
other/0 |
|
activities/3 |
|
activities/2 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/date |
2014-09-03T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/date |
2014-09-03T00:00:00
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/1/committees/2/date |
2014-07-22T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/2/rapporteur |
|
committees/2/date |
2014-07-22T00:00:00
|
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
activities/1/committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de188ea0fb8127435bdc3eeNew
4f1adbe1b819f207b30000ec |
activities/1/committees/3/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de189630fb8127435bdc48fNew
4f1adc87b819f207b3000121 |
committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de188ea0fb8127435bdc3eeNew
4f1adbe1b819f207b30000ec |
committees/3/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de189630fb8127435bdc48fNew
4f1adc87b819f207b3000121 |
activities/1/committees/1 |
|
activities/1/committees/3 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/3 |
|
activities/1/committees/0/date |
2014-01-20T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/1/committees/1/date |
2014-01-21T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/1/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/date |
2014-01-20T00:00:00
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/1/date |
2014-01-21T00:00:00
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
LIBE/7/14666New
LIBE/8/00267 |
activities/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://old.eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2013&nu_doc=0821New
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2013&nu_doc=0821 |
activities/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2013&nu_doc=0821New
http://old.eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2013&nu_doc=0821 |
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52013PC0821:EN
|
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52013PC0821:EN
|
activities/1/committees/0/date |
2014-01-20T00:00:00
|
activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/date |
2014-01-20T00:00:00
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/docs/1 |
|
activities/0/docs/2 |
|
activities/0/docs/3 |
|
activities/0/type |
Old
Legislative proposalNew
Legislative proposal published |
activities/1 |
|
committees/1/date |
2014-01-21T00:00:00
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
LIBE/7/14666
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
activities/0/commission/0 |
|
other/0 |
|
activities/0/docs/0/text |
|
activities/0/docs/0/celexid |
CELEX:52013PC0821:EN
|
activities/0/docs/0/url |
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2013&nu_doc=0821
|
activities/0/docs/1 |
|
activities/0/docs/2 |
|
activities/0/docs/3 |
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|