16.

Notes that, with respect to the seven conditions established by Parliament in its resolution of 21 October 2021, the Commission assesses that the Agency has made ‘significant progress over the last 1,5 years’, but ‘more still needs to be done’; considers for each of the seven conditions the following: (a) is disappointed that the Agency is still unable to fulfil the requirement of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896, which provided for the recruitment of at least 40 fundamental rights monitors (FRMs) by December 2020; notes with regret that to the present date only a total of 20 FRMs have taken office, out of which 5 at AD level and 15 at AST level, hence facing a significant delay in complying with the first condition as set out in the 2019 discharge; notes that the subsequent steps of the recruitment are under the control of the FRO, conducted independently from the office of the executive director; notes that the FRO finalised, at the end of February 2022, the procedure for the recruitment of the second batch of 20 FRMs in the AD function group, who, however, have not yet taken office to the present date; notes with regret that 8 out of these 20 additional FRMs were already employed in the AST function group, and that therefore a complementary call for applications has to be launched; welcomes the cooperation between the Agency and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights in that recruitment; (b) notes that all three deputy executive directors have been recruited and have joined the Agency; (c) notes that the executive director signed, on 25 February 2022, the standard operating procedure on the mechanism to withdraw the financing of, or suspend or terminate, or not launch Agency’s activities; notes that Article 46 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 requires the Agencies’ executive director to suspend, terminate, or not launch activities when there are risks to violations of fundamental rights; notes that the Agency did not evaluate its activities in Greece, even though reports by institutions of Member States, the Council of Europe, and the United Nations show that the Agency was carrying out operations in sections where simultaneously, fundamental rights violations were taking place; stresses that meeting condition referred to in point (g) of this paragraph (on the suspension of operations in Hungary) is a relevant part of the proper implementation of Article 46 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 as formulated in that condition; (d) notes that the executive director signed, in April 2021, the revised standard operating procedure on the SIR mechanism defining the role of the FRO in the process; notes that a report on the practical implementation of this procedure has been presented by the executive director and the FRO, concluding that there is a need to further revise the procedure; stresses furthermore that the SIR mechanism, though not automatically triggering an investigation, are followed up and enable the FRO to be in the lead; notes that the Agency has not yet fixed deadlines with Member States as to when they need to respond to a SIR; (e) the Agency has adopted special rules to guarantee the independence of the FRO, it has recruited and adopted a new FRO as well as a deputy FRO; notes that the Agency has drawn up a fundamental rights strategy and action plan, it has adopted a specialised fundamental rights training curriculum for FRMs and has also revised its complaints mechanism; (f) notes that the Agency has completed the implementation of a competency management project and has adopted a value-adding knowledge management and need-to-know policy, which is currently upgraded with new improvements, while the implementation of the situational awareness and monitoring division’s transformation programme and a human resources capacity assessment are still in progress; notes that the Agency has postponed the deadline to fully implement recommendation 5 to 30 June 2022, beyond the timeframe for the implementation set out in the Court’s special report, in the context of a formal analysis to identify the Agency’s staff needs, especially in the areas risk analysis and vulnerability assessment; (g) notes that the Agency continues to operate in Hungary, though the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘Court of Justice’) concluded in a case initiated by the Commission that Hungary’s activities are incompatible with the Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; notes that the Agency is providing operational assistance on these return operations; notes that additional safeguards have been put in place and all requests from Hungary for support are assessed on a case-by-case basis; notes that the FSWG called upon the Agency to suspend its support-related activities in Hungary; emphasises that the Court of Justice judgment gives clear guidance on the executive director to implement Article 46 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 and suspend the activities in Hungary. Concludes that the Agency has only partially met the conditions set out in Parliament’s resolution of 21 October 2021; calls upon the Agency to present a detailed roadmap to the discharge authority on how it intends to fulfil the outstanding concerns, together with a clear and detailed timeframe for these actions; urges moreover the Agency to rapidly take all necessary measures suggested by the OLAF investigation, in accordance with the legislation in place, and inform the discharge authority without delay about the scope and timeline of these proceedings; underlines that the response of the Agency constitutes an essential element to be evaluated in the discharge procedure for the financial year 2020;