APPENDIX

The following amendments, which received at least a quarter of the votes cast, were rejected during the discussions (Rule 59(3) of the Rules of Procedure):

Point 3.7

The most severe challenges are present in some Member States, where powerful political actors have turned against the independence of the judiciary, and against institutions and organisations which compose and uphold the pluralist democratic system. The Communication does not consider sufficiently this essential aspect, preferring a perspective in which institutions - Parliaments, governments and ministries, constitutional courts, professional bodies - are separated from political and electoral competition. This ‘hands off’ approach to party politics and elections prevents any explanation of why powerful actors work against the rule of law and democracy and why they seem at the same time popular and unstoppable. The political, cultural and sociological aspects of the rule of law challenges affecting democracies are an essential area which has been ignored in the EU’s analysis and response so far. This partly explains the limitations of the current approach and tools — including the Article 7(1) procedure. Through its connection with civil society in its entirety, including the social partners, the EESC is particularly well placed to offer a space for a better analysis, debate and response to these political, sociological and cultural aspects of challenges to democracy and the rule of law.

Reason

The authors of the opinion go too far in their assessment of Member States’ institutions. The proposed text could be seen as disrespectful to institutions that are expected to maintain a pluralistic system. The remaining part of this point reflects the expectations in terms of the EU’s analyses on the rule of law.

Voting

Votes in favour : 47 Votes against : 141 Abstentions : 19

Point 5.2

The EESC considers it vital to create a legally binding European mechanism, a framework actively involving the Commission, the Parliament and the Council and in which the EESC plays an important role representing civil society. This mechanism will complement existing tools (1) and should entail a preventive component to allow stakeholders (businesses, trade unions, civil society organisations, national human rights institutions and public authorities) and experts to identify shortcomings as they emerge at national level and debate their resolution at an early stage. Such a mechanism would also help in the burden-sharing between the institutions and increase joint ownership of EU actions in this field. This mechanism would need to be applied with caution so as to avoid implementing it for current policy objectives and causing cultural conflicts.

Reason

The proposed addition does not limit the support of the EESC for the mechanism. It contributes commentary on political neutrality and recognition of cultural diversity.

Voting

Votes in favour : 42 Votes against : 153 Abstentions : 23

Point 1.6

The EESC maintains its support for the creation of an EU-level mechanism to monitor respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights. The EESC considers it vital to create a legally binding European mechanism, a framework actively involving the Commission, the Parliament and the Council and in which the EESC plays an important role representing civil society. This mechanism should encompass a preventive component allowing experts and civil society representatives to trigger an early warning on specific developments and debate proposals for solutions including all relevant stakeholders. Such a mechanism would also help in the burden-sharing between the institutions and increase joint ownership of EU actions. This mechanism would need to be applied with caution so as to avoid implementing it for current policy objectives and causing cultural conflicts.

Reason

The proposed addition does not limit the support of the EESC for the mechanism. It contributes commentary on political neutrality and recognises the cultural diversity we are proud of.

Voting

Votes in favour : 42 Votes against : 153 Abstentions : 23

The following paragraphs of the section opinion were amended to reflect the amendment adopted by the assembly but received more than one quarter of the votes cast (Rule 59(4) of the Rules of Procedure):

Point 3.12

Civil Society Organisations, human rights defenders, whistleblowers and journalists are in the front line when the rule of law deteriorates and in a very difficult situation when there is a breach of law in a given Member State. It is they who uphold the observance of rights, monitor the situation and report violations and it is at the grassroots level that they can send out early warning signals. Therefore, the EESC believes that their role is of primordial importance, as is that of the media and investigative journalism. Therefore, ways of protecting CSOs and the media are necessary for any tenable way forward. Proposals for their role must feature prominently in the proposals that the Commission will present after the reflection period.

Voting

Votes in favour : 122 Votes against : 73 Abstentions : 20

Point 1.11

Education, both formal and non-formal, has a key role to play in building the democratic and rule of law culture. Liberal d Democracy and the rule of law should be in the hearts and minds of every European citizen; The EESC calls on the European Commission to propose an ambitious communication, education and citizen-awareness strategy on fundamental rights, the rule of law and democracy.

Voting

Votes in favour : 119 Votes against : 73 Abstentions : 21

(1) As the European Parliament proposed in its resolution of 27 February 2014 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (2012), P7_TA(2014)0173, rapporteur: Louis Michel, 22 November, para 9.