ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
29.

modus operandi in fraudulent irregularities that touches upon ethics and integrity; notes that there was a significant fall in fraudulent irregularities in rural development due to the decline in detections related to the 2007-2013 programming period, in line with the programming lifecycle, and a slow start of detections related to the 2014-2020 programming period, and that more fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities were still detected in rural development than in direct support; points out, however, that market measures recorded the highest fraud detection rate (FDR) at 0,87 %, more than four times that of rural development with regard to fraudulent irregularities, and that non-fraudulent irregularities represented nearly double the irregularities detection rate (IDR) of that of rural development; notes, moreover, that according to the Court of Auditors’ 2017 annual reports Notes that with regard to the common agricultural policy (CAP), the detections of irregularities were concentrated in a few Member States, above all for fraudulent irregularities, which suggests that different approaches to the use of criminal law to protect the EU budget or reporting practices on suspected fraud could be significant factors behind the differences between the Member States; notes that while the overall financial amounts were relatively stable in 2019, there was an increase in those relating to direct support and a decrease in those relating to rural development; notes, in particular, that in the area of direct support, most detections indicated the use of falsified documents or requests for aid, while in rural development many detections related to implementation; is worried that the creation of artificial conditions for receiving financial support is a common type of fraud in direct support, indicating ain fraudulent irregularities that touches upon ethics and integrity; notes that there was a significant fall in fraudulent irregularities in rural development due to the decline in detections related to the 2007-2013 programming period, in line with the programming lifecycle, and a slow start of detections related to the 2014-2020 programming period, and that more fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities were still detected in rural development than in direct support; points out, however, that market measures recorded the highest fraud detection rate (FDR) at 0,87 %, more than four times that of rural development with regard to fraudulent irregularities, and that non-fraudulent irregularities represented nearly double the irregularities detection rate (IDR) of that of rural development; notes, moreover, that according to the Court of Auditors’ 2017 annual reports ( 18 ) , the manner in which expenditure is disbursed has an impact on the risk of error and, in particular, errors were mainly confined to cost reimbursements, whereas the error rate for entitlement payments was below the materiality threshold of 2 %;
17.

Welcomes the support provided by the Member States, Norway and the EU institutions and agencies, notably Europol, Frontex and the European Asylum Support Office, to the Member States affected by the migratory crisis created by the Belarusian regime and encourages them to continue their support, including through further allocation of EU emergency aid, and invites those who have not yet taken advantage of it to do so; calls on the Member States and EU institutions to deal urgently with the multidimensional crisis at the Belarusian border, to help migrants stuck at the EU’s borders with Belarus and to provide them with the necessary support; expresses concern about the lack of transparency at the Polish-Belarusian border and urges the Polish authorities to ensure, in a transparent way, that any legislation, policy or practice at the Polish-Belarusian border complies with EU law and to secure access to the border region for civil society organisations and media as well as to cooperate with Frontex to jointly resolve the ongoing crisis; calls for the EU, its Member States and international organisations to step up their efforts towards dismantling these state-ordered human trafficking flows, including by placing diplomatic pressure on the countries of origin of migrants and by imposing sanctions on Belarusian officials, individuals and entities involved, as well as on international criminal networks operating on the EU’s territory responsible for transfers to final destinations; highlights that Belarus has recently suspended its visa regime with Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt and South Africa, enabling visa-free travel from these countries to Belarus;
10.

Stresses that failing to address intimate partner violence in custody rights and visitation decisions is a violation by neglect of the human rights to life, to a life without violence, and to the healthy development of women and children; strongly urges any form of violence, including witnessing violence against a parent or close person, to be considered in law and in practice as a violation of human rights and as an act against the best interests of the child; is deeply concerned about the alarming number of femicides in Europe, which is the most extreme form of violence against women; is concerned about the inadequacy of the protection granted to women, as evidenced by the number of femicides and infanticides which take place after the woman has reported gender-based violence; stresses that in the best interests of the child, the parental authority of the accused parent should be systematically suspended in cases of femicide for the entire duration of the proceedings; further emphasises that descendants should be exempted from maintenance obligations towards a parent who has been condemned for femicide; urges the Members States to ensure that access to justice and victim support is accessible, adequate and free for all women victims of intimate partner violence in all their diversity and status, and to provide interpreting services where needed; calls on the Member States to ensure that services take into consideration the intersecting forms of discrimination suffered by women and children; calls on the Member States to strengthen care, monitoring and protection of women who report gender-based violence; calls on the Member States to ensure that support services take a coordinated approach to identifying women at risk, to ensure that all these measures are available and accessible to all women and girls within their jurisdiction; stresses that when a perpetrator is arrested in flagrante delicto, the victim should be taken to a safe place and the protection of the children from the aggressor should be compulsory and also stresses that, if the legal conditions for arrest are not met, the alleged abuser should nonetheless be immediately removed from the victim’s house and kept away from the victim’s workplace to prevent the risk of further violence;
2.

Notes that 2018 was the first year of implementation of the Regulation; welcomes the 2019 annual activity report presented by the Authority; takes note of the main activities and challenges encountered during 2019; notes that the Authority performed its first review of the accounts of European political parties and foundations in the context of the 2019 European elections, ensuring compliance with the Regulation, while the Directorate-General for Finance of the European Parliament ensured compliance with the Financial Regulation; welcomes the fact that the Authority did not have to impose sanctions on any European political party or foundation in 2019; takes note, additionally, of the fact that the Authority intervened in proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union’s General Court, and liaised with Member States to set up a network of national contact points and data protection authorities;
12.

Recalls its strong support for human rights defenders in Cuba and their work; calls on all Member State representatives to raise human rights concerns and enhance their support for genuine and independent civil society during visits to the Cuban authorities, and to meet the Sakharov Prize laureates when visiting Cuba in order to ensure the consistent internal and external application of the EU’s human rights policy, thereby strengthening the participation of independent civil society representatives and improving the work of human rights defenders; regrets the fact that Cuban and European independent civil society representatives have been excluded from taking part in the dialogue, which is binding according to the provisions of the PDCA; regrets the divergence in positions and policies on Cuba between the EEAS and the European Parliament and strongly calls on the EEAS to not abandon the civil society of Cuba;
J.

whereas in the past six years, thousands of people have lost their lives to jihadist and insurgent attacks; whereas, in two years, over 1 000 schools have been closed and many people have fled their homes to escape the violence; whereas in June 2021, 174 people died in the villages of Solhan and Tadaryat in the deadliest attack since 2015; whereas on 4 November 2021, a jihadist attack on the gendarmerie garrison in Inata in northern Burkina Faso killed 53 of the 120 soldiers who were waiting for logistical supplies and support, including food rations; whereas Human Rights Watch reported summary executions of hundreds of suspects by security forces and pro-government militias, and whereas virtually none of these attacks have been investigated and nobody has been prosecuted;
A.

whereas violence, human rights violations and attacks against journalists and human rights defenders, including environmental defenders and indigenous people and communities, and women rights defenders are dramatically rising in Mexico; whereas widespread violence in Mexico continues to increase as was seen during the local and regional elections of June 2021, and whereas the situation of the rule of law is seriously deteriorating; whereas a concerning and dramatic number of journalists and human rights defenders, particularly those who investigate corruption involving public officials or expose the work of criminal drug cartels, especially at a local level, are being warned, harassed, threatened, raped, attacked, enforcedly disappeared and even killed and surveyed either by government authorities or criminal groups; whereas a mass murder took place on 27 February 2022 with 17 people killed;
J.

whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has been used by the DPRK to further isolate the country from the outside world, resulting in exacerbated entrenched human rights violations and a negative impact on its people’s health; whereas humanitarian organisations remain unable to return to the DPRK; whereas the limited international presence inside the country and the significant fall in the number of escapees arriving in the Republic of Korea makes the documentation of human rights violations more challenging than ever; whereas the DPRK has closed its borders to all external crossings to avoid the spread of COVID-19 and has not distributed any COVID-19 vaccines to its people, claiming that the virus does not exist in the country; whereas since the start of the pandemic, North Korea has become even more isolated from the rest of the world due to its notoriously weak health infrastructure and the lack of vaccination of its population; whereas according to the latest UN Human Rights Council report published in March 2022, North Korea is more isolated than ever due to prolonged large-scale border closures and the travel restrictions between cities and regions imposed in January 2020; whereas the oppressive control of the population has further tightened;
10.

Is convinced that the coordination of national fiscal policies remains crucial in underpinning the recovery; notes that the overall fiscal stance, taking into account national budgets and the RRF, is projected to remain supportive in 2022 to sustain the recovery and to ensure a gradual shift in fiscal policy; agrees with the Commission that Member States with low or medium levels of debt should pursue or maintain a supportive fiscal stance, and that Member States with high levels of debt should use the RRF to finance additional investment to support the recovery, while pursuing a prudent fiscal policy that does not, however, prevent the public investment needed to fund sectors of strategic importance for the recovery and resilience of European economies and societies; agrees with the Commission that all Member States should preserve or broadly preserve their national financed investment;
51.

Underlines the need to invest more in education formats about the European Union at school and university level, for both formal and vocational education and training, by developing new curricula; asks the Commission to propose a recommendation containing indicative primary, secondary and higher education, as well as vocational education and training, curricula on the EU and global civic education for its voluntary adoption by the Member States, in full respect of Treaty provisions, in particular Article 165 TFEU, developed jointly with Member States’ experts, specialised faculties of European affairs, teachers, educators, students and the wider educational community, and accompanied by incentive measures for its uptake; believes that said common demonstrative curricula should foster a better understanding of the history of European integration, the organisation and structure of the existing EU institutions, the European electoral and decision-making processes, including the means of citizens’ participation in the democratic life of the EU, combining different pedagogical approaches and methods, including theoretical and project-based learning, adapted to the needs of learners;
15.

Calls for the EU and its Member States to closely monitor the situation on the ground through their local representatives and embassies in Nicaragua; calls on the EU delegation and the Member States with diplomatic missions in the country to fully implement the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, to provide all appropriate support to human rights defenders who have been detained, including prison visits and trial monitoring, to publicly denounce abuses against human rights defenders and independent media and to support their work; calls on the EU delegation and the Member States to use all available instruments to increase their support for human rights defenders’ work, to facilitate the issuing of emergency visas where appropriate, and to provide temporary shelter in the EU Member States for humanitarian reasons;
5.

Submits to the Council under the ordinary revision procedure laid down in Article 48 TEU, for those reasons, the following proposals for the amendment of the Treaties, inter alia: — to enhance the Union’s capacity to act by reforming voting procedures, including allowing decisions in the Council by qualified majority voting instead of unanimity in relevant areas, such as the adoption of sanctions and so-called passerelle clauses, and in the event of an emergency; — to adapt the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties, especially in the areas of health and cross-border health threats, in the completion of the energy union based on energy efficiency and renewable energies designed in line with international agreements to mitigate climate change, in defence, and in social and economic policies; to ensure the European Pillar of Social Rights is fully implemented and to incorporate social progress in Article 9 TFEU linked to a Social Progress Protocol into the Treaties; to support strengthening the competitiveness and resilience of the EU economy, with special attention paid to small and medium-sized enterprises and competitiveness checks and to promote future-oriented investments focused on the just, green and digital transitions; — to provide Parliament with full co-decision rights on the EU budget, and with the right to initiate, amend or repeal legislation; — to strengthen the procedure for the protection of the values the EU is founded on and to clarify the determination and consequences of breaches of fundamental values (Article 7 TEU and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union);
6.

Reminds all Member States, in this context, of their commitment to the OECD global deal; stresses that a quick and extensive implementation of the agreement will be decisive for the global success of the process; stresses the importance for the EU of assuming a global leadership role in fighting tax havens by being the first region to implement the OECD agreement; stresses the risks of and associated with non-implementation of the Pillar II Directive in the EU; underlines that the non-implementation of the Pillar II Directive by the EU could jeopardise the implementation of Pillar II by the US and other jurisdictions;
P6_TA(2005)0024

Request for defence of parliamentary immunity of Mr Koldo Gorostiaga

European Parliament decision on the request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Koldo Gorostiaga (2004/2102(IMM))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the request by Koldo Gorostiaga for defence of his immunity in connection with legal proceedings pending before a French court, of 7 July 2004, announced in plenary sitting on 22 July 2004,

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

- having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 12 May 1964 and 10 July 1986 [1],

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

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0006/2005),

A. whereas Koldo Gorostiaga was elected to the European Parliament in the fifth direct elections held on 13 June 1999, and whereas his credentials were verified on 15 December 1999 [2], and his term of office expired on 19 July 2004,

B. whereas Koldo Gorostiaga complains that a certain amount of his money was seized by the Court of First Instance of Paris and whereas he claims that these monies were allowances paid to him by Parliament,

C. whereas Koldo Gorostiaga asserts that the seizure of his alleged property constituted a violation of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities,

D. whereas Koldo Gorostiaga complains that he would have been declared "under examination" by the second investigating Chamber of the Court of Appeals of Paris, in its judgment of 11 June 2004, and that this was a violation of the Protocol on Privileges and Immunities,

E. whereas, on basis of the evidence that he has provided, Koldo Gorostiaga is not protected by Parliamentary immunity in respect of any of the claims which have been drawn to the attention of the President of the European Parliament,

1. Decides not to defend the immunity and privileges of Koldo Gorostiaga.

[1] See Case 101/63 Wagner v. Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195 and Case 149/85 Wybot v. Faure and others [1986] ECR 2391.

[2] European Parliament decision on the verification of credentials of Members following the fifth direct elections to the European Parliament on 10 to 13 June 1999 (OJ C 296, 18.10.2000, p. 93).

--------------------------------------------------
P6_TA(2006)0426

Defence of immunity of Mario Borghezio

European Parliament decision on the request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Mario Borghezio (2006/2151(IMM))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the request by Mario Borghezio for defence of his immunity, forwarded by letter of 23 May 2006 and announced in plenary sitting on 1 June 2006,

- having heard Mario Borghezio in accordance with Rule 7(3) of its Rules of Procedure,

- 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 and 10 July 1986 [1] of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,

- having regard to Article 68 of the Constitution of the Italian Republic,

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

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0329/2006),

1. Decides not to defend the immunity and privileges of Mario Borghezio.

[1] Case 101/63 Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195 and Case 149/85 Wybot v Faure and others [1986] ECR 2391.

--------------------------------------------------
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 45/95

Amendment of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 on budgetary discipline and sound financial management

P6_TA(2008)0617

European Parliament decision of 18 December 2008 on a draft amendment of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (2008/2320(ACI))

(2010/C 45 E/18)

The European Parliament,

— having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1), and in particular point 25 thereof,

— having regard to the Commission proposal for a draft amendment of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (COM(2008)0834),

— having regard to its resolution of 18 December 2008 on a draft amendment of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (2),

— having regard to Rules 120(1) and 43(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

— having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (A6-0509/2008),

A. whereas the Committee on Budgets recommends approval of the proposed amendment of the abovementioned Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006,

B. whereas the proposed amendment does not give rise to any concern with regard to the Treaties and Parliament's Rules of Procedure,

1. Approves the amendment of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (2007-2013) annexed to this decision;

2. Instructs its President to forward this decision and the annex hereto to the Council and the Commission, for information.

(1) OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

(2) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2008)0618.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 16/77

Request for waiver of the immunity of Massimo D'Alema

P6_TA(2008)0538

European Parliament decision of 18 November 2008 on the request for waiver of the immunity of Massimo D'Alema (2008/2298(IMM))

(2010/C 16 E/20)

The European Parliament,

— having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity of Massimo D'Alema, forwarded by the Public Prosecution Service at the Court of Milan on 30 May 2008, and announced in plenary sitting on 16 June 2008,

— having regard to Article 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 and 10 July 1986 (1) of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,

— having regard to Rules 6 and 7 of its Rules of Procedure,

— having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0422/2008),

1. Decides not to authorise the use of the telephone intercepts in question and not to waive the immunity of Massimo D'Alema;

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

(1) Case 101/63 Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195 and Case 149/85 Wybot v Faure and others [1986] ECR 2391.