ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
16.

Notes the work of the Advisory Committee on Harassment and its Prevention in the Workplace and the Advisory Committee dealing with complaints between Accredited Parliamentary Assistants and Members of the European Parliament concerning Harassment and its Prevention at the Workplace; calls for full transparency on how Parliament is addressing issues of harassment while protecting the identity of those affected, and invites both committees to draft and publish their monitoring reports and risk assessments annually on the European Parliament website, to implement control mechanisms, and, in particular, to publish the external assessment carried out on the Advisory Committee dealing with complaints between Accredited Parliamentary Assistants and Members of the European Parliament concerning Harassment and its Prevention at the Workplace; calls again ( 12 ) for an independent evaluation by external and transparently chosen auditors of the current system with regard to its effectiveness and, if necessary, for modifications to be proposed as soon as possible and before the end of this legislative term in order to ensure independence and gender balance and avoid conflicts of interest in the existing structures, and therefore: a) asks for the composition of the two committees to be changed to ensure that independent experts with proven expertise in tackling harassment issues in the workplace, including doctors, therapists and legal experts in the domain of harassment are formal members with voting rights; b) points out that Members of the European Parliament could be victims of sexual harassment and calls for concrete action in this regard by the relevant Parliament services and political groups; c) recommends that a task force of independent experts be set up with a mandate to examine the situation of sexual harassment and abuse in Parliament, in order to carry out an evaluation of its existing Advisory Committee dealing with complaints between Accredited Parliamentary Assistants and Members of the European Parliament concerning Harassment and its Prevention at the Workplace and the Staff Advisory Committee for Parliament Staff on Harassment Prevention, and propose adequate changes;
32.

Reiterates its strong support for the International Criminal Court (ICC) as the only international institution able to prosecute some of the world’s most heinous crimes and deliver justice for their victims; highlights the independence and impartiality of the ICC; calls on the EU and the Member States to provide adequate financial support to enable the ICC to carry out its tasks; supports the universality of the Rome Statute and calls for the EU to include a specific clause on its ratification and access in agreements to be concluded with third countries; requests that the EU step up its engagement with the countries which have not yet acceded to the Rome Statute; strongly condemns any attacks on the staff or independence of the ICC; is of the opinion that attempts to undermine the credibility and essential role of the ICC constitute attacks on multilateralism and should be contested as such by the EU and its Member States, including when they originate from close partner countries; stresses that the ICC needs full access to the countries it investigates to be able to perform its tasks; underlines the potential of other innovative tools to bring the perpetrators of international crimes to account, including universal jurisdiction at national-level judiciaries; underlines, in this context, the current discussions at the UN International Law Commission on the immunity of state officials and calls for follow-up to these; calls for the EU to continue to strengthen capacity-building at national level in third countries, while supporting international criminal tribunals and mechanisms, as well as platforms and organisations dedicated to the fight against impunity such as the Coalition for the ICC;
4.

Regrets the Commission’s inadequate response to the ECJ rulings of 16 February 2022, notwithstanding its commitment to finalise the guidelines on the application of the Rule of Law Mechanism; reiterates, however, that the text of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation is clear and does not require any additional interpretation in order to be applied, and that the co-legislators have not delegated to the Commission any powers to this effect; underlines that the ECJ has recognised, in particular, that the Member States cannot maintain that they are not in a position to determine with sufficient precision the essential content of and requirements stemming from the regulation; highlights, in this context, that the process of developing guidelines, which are not legally binding and are not part of the regulation, must not in any event cause further delay to the application of the regulation, and points out in particular that the Commission has a duty to implement EU legislation regardless of electoral timetables in the Member States;
11.

Calls on the Member States to ensure that their conventions and cooperation agreements with non-EU countries, including China, in the area of health and research respect the EU’s ethical principles in relation to organ donation and the use for scientific purposes of elements and products of the human body; calls on the relevant institutions in the Member States to evaluate and revisit the terms of their collaborations with Chinese institutions on transplant medicine, research and training;
2.

Welcomes Moldova’s submission of its application to join the EU on 3 March 2022, confirming its chosen European path; notes that this step further underscores the need for an intensified high-level political dialogue with the Moldovan authorities in order to achieve tangible and sustainable progress in the implementation of the key reforms; calls for the EU institutions to grant EU candidate status to Moldova, along with Ukraine and Georgia, in line with Article 49 TEU and on the basis of merit, and, in the meantime, to continue working towards its integration into the EU single market; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to further increase their engagement with their Moldovan counterparts and to maximise their political, technical and financial support to Moldova during this crucial time in order to give further impetus to progress and to ensure adequate absorption capacity for EU assistance; stresses the need to look into ways to consolidate and enhance the capacity of Moldovan public institutions in this regard, including a joint EU-Moldova project to set up a higher-education institution for the training of human resources for Moldovan public administration, ensuring maximum transparency of the selection and promotion procedure and providing EU assistance for the necessary top-ups of the salaries of civil servants in Moldova’s government working in key areas of European integration reforms;
82.

Takes note of the involvement of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board in impact assessments, fitness checks, and major evaluations of current legislation, which improves the evidence-based work of the Commission; notes that the Regulatory Scrutiny Board can play a role in ensuring an unbiased and high-quality level of work from the Commission and that its expertise and experience could be used to carry out other tasks within the Commission; stresses that the Regulatory Scrutiny Board can only provide an effective check on the Commission’s work if its independence and impartiality are indisputably established; calls, in this regard, for the independence of the board and for the transparency of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board on meetings with stakeholders, reviews, recommendations and opinions to be significantly improved, including through making the use of the Transparency Register mandatory for members of the Board; underlines that the work of the Board should not ultimately affect the Commission’s capacity to propose legislation or unduly delay the adoption of legislative proposals; calls on the Commission to publish all of the Board’s opinions immediately after adoption, without any exception, in order to ensure coherence, transparency and accountability throughout the process, and also to deliver them to Parliament and the Council; further calls on the Commission also to make the draft evaluations and draft impact assessments that are submitted to the board available to the co-legislators; takes note that the Regulatory Scrutiny Board is composed of four members of the Commission and three external experts; calls on the Commission to reconsider the decision-making process of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, as the current system allows opinions to be adopted without the input of external experts or to establish an independent Regulatory Scrutiny Board outside the Commission; further calls on the Commission to extend its collaboration with the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, strengthening it by providing more means for it to do its work and to ensure support from the Joint Research Centre;
O.

whereas Article 3 of Interpol’s constitution prohibits any intervention or activity of political, military, religious or racial character; whereas abuses in high profile cases in multiple member countries of Interpol have still been observed in recent years; whereas politically motivated extraditions are often triggered by the abusive issuing of a red notice or ‘wanted person diffusion’ through Interpol; whereas scarce information is made available by Interpol on the manner in which it reviews red notices, its administrative ability to do so and the outcomes of these reviews, leading to a lack of transparency as regards how Interpol works towards effectively countering politically motivated red notices; whereas member countries and other international organisations have little access to information about the overall handling of red notices and diffusions; whereas no information is available on the countries making the requests for such notices, how many requests are accepted and refused, the grounds for refusal, which countries perform better or worse in terms of acceptance or refusal of requests and the development of these practices over time; whereas this makes it impossible to evaluate the quality of the General Secretariat of Interpol’s vetting process, the work of the National Central Bureaus or the quality of the requests submitted by countries;
78.

Expresses deep concerns about the pushbacks of refugees to Serbia and Montenegro, as well as the limitations placed on their movements and the limitations of public transport inside the country; deplores the failure of the authorities to address the severe migration-related humanitarian crisis at the border; reiterates its serious concern over the rights and situation of people in transit in BiH; stresses that EU border management by the BiH authorities is of concern in light of the violations of human rights, resulting, in particular, from the lack of independence, credibility and effectiveness of the recently established border mechanism; underlines the EU’s duty to conduct a humane migration approach aimed at protecting the fundamental rights of persons in need of international protection in counties of transit such as BiH; recalls the need for human rights and solidarity-based solutions on migration, asylum and border management in coordination and cooperation with affected EU Member States on the EU’s external border, ensuring adequate humanitarian assistance and appropriate reception capacities across the country; urges BiH to conclude an agreement with the European Asylum Support Office; welcomes the opening of the EU-funded centre in Lipa, but regrets the fact that it still lacks accessibility and remains concerned about reports of insufficient reception conditions; takes note of the closure of the Miral camp on 28 April 2022 and the fact that people living there were forcibly moved to the Lipa camp, which is far away from any basic facilities;
52005DP0268(01)

European Parliament decision on the request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Umberto Bossi (2004/2101(IMM))



Official Journal 157 E , 06/07/2006 P. 0069 - 0070
P6_TA(2007)0193

Delegation to Eurolat

European Parliament decision of 22 May 2007 on the setting up and numerical strength of the Standing Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly

The European Parliament,

- having regard to Rule 188 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to its decision of 10 March 2004 on the number of interparliamentary delegations, delegations to joint parliamentary committees and delegations to parliamentary cooperation committees [1],

- having regard to the Constituent Act of 8 November 2006 of the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly;

1. Decides to set up a Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly;

2. Decides that the numerical strength of the Delegation shall be 60 full members and 30 substitutes;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission for information.

[1] OJ C 102 E, 28.4.2004, p. 635.

--------------------------------------------------
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 271/76

Thursday 8 May 2008

Implementing measures (amendment of Rule 81)

P6_TA(2008)0190

European Parliament decision of 8 May 2008 on amendment of Rule 81 of Parliament's Rules of Procedure on implementing measures (2008/2027(REG))

2009/C 271 E/10

The European Parliament,

having regard to the letter from its President of 27 March 2008 transmitting the interinstitutional agreement as approved by the Conference of Presidents on 12 December 2007,

having regard to the interinstitutional agreement between the European Parliament and the Commission on procedures for implementing Council Decision 1999/468/EC, laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission, as amended by Decision 2006/512/EC (1),

having regard to Rules 120(2), 201 and 202 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A6-0108/2008),

1. Decides to amend its Rules of Procedure as shown below;

2. Points out that the amendment will enter into force on the first day of the next part-session;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and Commission, for information.

PRESENT TEXT AMENDMENT Amendment 1 Parliament's Rules of Procedure Rule 81 — paragraph 4 — point (a) (a) the time for scrutiny shall start to run when the draft of measures has been submitted to Parliament in all official languages; (a) the time for scrutiny shall start to run when the draft of measures has been submitted to Parliament in all official languages. Where shorter time-limits apply (Article 5a(5)(b) of Council Decision 1999/468/EC laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing powers conferred on the Commission) and in cases of urgency (Article 5a(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC), the time for scrutiny shall, unless the Chair of the committee responsible objects, start to run from the date of receipt by Parliament of the final draft implementing measures in the language versions submitted to the members of the committee established in accordance with Decision 1999/468/EC. Rule 138 shall not apply in this case;

(1) Texts Adopted, 8.5.2008, P6_TA(2008)0189.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 9/67

Thursday 9 October 2008

Use by Parliament of the symbols of the Union (new Rule 202a)

P6_TA(2008)0472

European Parliament decision of 9 October 2008 on insertion in Parliament’s Rules of Procedure of a new Rule 202a on the use by Parliament of the symbols of the Union (2007/2240(REG))

2010/C 9 E/12

The European Parliament,

having regard to its resolution of 11 July 2007 on the convening of the Intergovernmental Conference (1), in particular paragraph 23 thereof,

having regard to the letter from its President of 12 September 2007,

having regard to the importance of symbols for reconnecting the citizens with the European Union and for building a European identity which is complementary to the national identities of the Member States,

having regard to the fact that the symbols have been in use for over 30 years by all European Institutions and were formally approved by the European Council in 1985 (2),

having regard to Rules 201 and 202 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A6-0347/2008),

1. Decides to amend its Rules of Procedure as shown below;

2. Decides that the amendment will enter into force on the day following its adoption;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission, for information.

PRESENT TEXT AMENDMENT Amendment 1 Parliament’s Rules of Procedure Title XIII — Miscellaneous Provisions — Rule 202a (new) Rule 202a The symbols of the Union 1. Parliament shall recognise and espouse the following symbols of the Union: — the flag showing a circle of twelve golden stars on a blue background; — the anthem based on the ‘Ode to Joy’ from the Ninth Symphony by Ludwig van Beethoven; — the motto ‘United in diversity’. 2. Parliament shall celebrate Europe Day on 9 May. 3. The flag shall be flown at all Parliament premises and on the occasion of official events. The flag shall be used in each meeting room of the Parliament. 4. The anthem shall be performed at the opening of each constitutive sitting and at other solemn sittings, notably to welcome heads of State or government or to greet new Members following enlargements. 5. The motto shall be reproduced on Parliament’s official documents. 6. The Bureau shall examine further use of the symbols within the Parliament. The Bureau shall lay down detailed provisions for the implementation of this Rule.

(1) OJ C 175 E, 10.7.2008, p. 347.

(2) Milan European Council of 28 and 29 June 1985.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 230/11

Wednesday 7 October 2009

Setting-up and definition of the powers, composition and term of office of a special committee on the financial, economic and social crisis

P7_TA(2009)0025

European Parliament decision of 7 October 2009 on setting up a special committee on the financial, economic and social crisis, and its powers, numerical composition and term of office

2010/C 230 E/03

The European Parliament,

having regard to the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 17 September 2009 to propose that a special committee on the financial, economic and social crisis be set up and that its powers, numerical composition and term of office be defined,

having regard to Rule 184 of its Rules of Procedure,

1. Decides to set up a special committee on the financial, economic and social crisis, vested with the following powers: (a) to analyse and evaluate the extent of the financial, economic and social crisis, its impact on the Union and its Member States, and the state of world governance, to propose appropriate measures for the long-term reconstruction of sound, stable financial markets able to support sustainable growth, social cohesion and employment at all levels, and to provide an assessment of the effect of those measures and the cost of inaction; (b) to analyse and evaluate the current implementation of Community legislation in all the areas concerned and the coordination of the measures taken by the Member States to support sustainable qualitative growth and long-term investment, with a view to combating unemployment and responding to demographic and climate challenges, while complying with the subsidiarity principle; (c) with this end in view, to establish the necessary contacts and hold hearings with the European Union institutions, national, European and international institutions and forums, the national parliaments and governments of the Member States and of third countries, and representatives of the scientific community, business and civil society, including the social partners, in close collaboration with the standing committees;

2. Decides, given that the powers of Parliament’s standing committees responsible for the adoption, monitoring and implementation of Community legislation relevant to this area remain unchanged, that the special committee may make recommendations regarding the measures and initiatives to be taken, in close collaboration with the standing committees;

3. Decides that the special committee shall have 45 members;
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 212/124

Tuesday 5 May 2009

Defence of the immunity and privileges of Aldo Patriciello

P6_TA(2009)0337

European Parliament decision of 5 May 2009 on the request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Aldo Patriciello (2009/2021(IMM))

2010/C 212 E/21

The European Parliament,

having regard to the request by Aldo Patriciello for defence of his immunity in connection with an investigation which is currently being carried out by the Public Prosecutor’s Office attached to the Isernia District Court, announced in plenary sitting of 9 March 2009,

having regard to Articles 9 and 10 of the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

having regard to the judgments of 12 May 1964, 10 July 1986 and 21 October 2008 (1) of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,

having regard to Rules 6(3) and 7 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0286/2009),

1. Decides to defend the immunity and privileges of Aldo Patriciello;

2. Instructs its President to forward this decision, and the report of its committee responsible, immediately to the appropriate authorities of the Italian Republic.

(1) Case 101/63 Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195, Case 149/85 Wybot v Faure and Others [1986] ECR 2 391 and Joined Cases C-200/07 and C-201/07 Marra v De Gregorio and Clemente, not yet reported.