natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Pověřuje svého předsedu, aby předal toto usnesení výboru odpovědnému za jednací řád, aby tento výbor mohl ještě před vstupem Ústavy v platnost předložit pozměňovací návrhy k jednacímu řádu.
Instructs its President to refer this resolution to the Committee responsible for the Rules of Procedure with a view to proposing appropriate amendments to the Rules before the entry into force of the Constitution.
Pověřuje svého předsedu, aby toto usnesení předal Komisi, Evropské radě a Radě ministrů.
Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the European Council and the Council of Ministers.
How the European Parliament approves the European Commission
How the European Parliament approves the European Commission
The Treaty in theory and practice
The Treaty in theory and practice
It is worthwhile recalling that the current procedure as laid down by the Treaties ‑ recently revised by the Treaty of Nice ‑ is characteristically over-complicated.
It is worthwhile recalling that the current procedure as laid down by the Treaties ‑ recently revised by the Treaty of Nice ‑ is characteristically over-complicated.
In successive IGCs the European Parliament has been concerned to assert that the Commission enjoys a dual legitimacy by being appointed by both the European Council and the European Parliament.
In successive IGCs the European Parliament has been concerned to assert that the Commission enjoys a dual legitimacy by being appointed by both the European Council and the European Parliament.
The right of investiture was first sought by the European Parliamentary Assembly as long ago as November 1960 (Rapporteur: Maurice Faure).
The right of investiture was first sought by the European Parliamentary Assembly as long ago as November 1960 (Rapporteur: Maurice Faure).
The Parliament first voted to accept the Thorn Commission in 1979.
The Parliament first voted to accept the Thorn Commission in 1979.
After the Stuttgart Declaration in 1983, the Delors Commission waited until the Parliament had expressed itself before taking its oath in front of the Court of Justice.
After the Stuttgart Declaration in 1983, the Delors Commission waited until the Parliament had expressed itself before taking its oath in front of the Court of Justice.
This has led to some tension between the Parliament and member states, a tension which emerged once more in the Convention.
This has led to some tension between the Parliament and member states, a tension which emerged once more in the Convention.
The Treaty of Maastricht gave the Parliament the right to be consulted over the appointment of the Commission President and a vote of approval over the college as a whole.
The Treaty of Maastricht gave the Parliament the right to be consulted over the appointment of the Commission President and a vote of approval over the college as a whole.
Article 158.2 TEC.
Article 158.2 TEC.
This procedure was used for the incoming Santer Commission in 1994.
This procedure was used for the incoming Santer Commission in 1994.
The Treaty of Amsterdam extended the Parliament's power of approval to that of the President.
The Treaty of Amsterdam extended the Parliament's power of approval to that of the President.
Article 214.2 TEC.
Article 214.2 TEC.
This procedure was used for the incoming Prodi Commission in 1999.
This procedure was used for the incoming Prodi Commission in 1999.
The Treaty of Nice left the Parliament's powers substantively unaltered, but enabled the Council, acting at the level of heads of government, to decide by QMV in place of unanimity.
The Treaty of Nice left the Parliament's powers substantively unaltered, but enabled the Council, acting at the level of heads of government, to decide by QMV in place of unanimity.
Article 214.2 TEC revised.
Article 214.2 TEC revised.
This procedure was used for the Barroso Commission in 2004.
This procedure was used for the Barroso Commission in 2004.
It is clear from the existing Treaty that the European Parliament does not quite ‘elect’ the Commission.
It is clear from the existing Treaty that the European Parliament does not quite ‘elect’ the Commission.
What happened in 2004 is this.
What happened in 2004 is this.
In June, after the European Parliamentary elections but following an initial disagreement, the European Council nominated José Manuel Durão Barroso.
In June, after the European Parliamentary elections but following an initial disagreement, the European Council nominated José Manuel Durão Barroso.
In July, once the new Parliament had assembled, Mr Barroso met with the Conference of Presidents and toured the party group meetings.
In July, once the new Parliament had assembled, Mr Barroso met with the Conference of Presidents and toured the party group meetings.
After hearing a statement from him, and following a lengthy debate spread over two days, the Parliament approved (by secret ballot) the nomination of Mr Barroso as President.
After hearing a statement from him, and following a lengthy debate spread over two days, the Parliament approved (by secret ballot) the nomination of Mr Barroso as President.
There was even a short suspension between the end of the debate and the vote to accommodate group meetings.
There was even a short suspension between the end of the debate and the vote to accommodate group meetings.
The vote, on 22 July, was 413 in favour, 251 against, with 44 abstentions.
The vote, on 22 July, was 413 in favour, 251 against, with 44 abstentions.
This compares with Romano Prodi's May 1999 election by 392 votes against 71, with 41 abstaining.
This compares with Romano Prodi's May 1999 election by 392 votes against 71, with 41 abstaining.
Note that the secret ballot was only introduced by the Rules change in 2002.
Note that the secret ballot was only introduced by the Rules change in 2002.
The Council, acting by qualified majority vote and ‘by common accord’ with Mr Barroso, then adopted the list of persons who had been proposed by each member state.
The Council, acting by qualified majority vote and ‘by common accord’ with Mr Barroso, then adopted the list of persons who had been proposed by each member state.
In theory, Mr Barroso could have rejected a candidate.
In theory, Mr Barroso could have rejected a candidate.
More realistically, he tried to influence a number of prime ministers in making their choice, particularly with respect to gender.
More realistically, he tried to influence a number of prime ministers in making their choice, particularly with respect to gender.
In his efforts to get more women into his Commission he promised them higher profile jobs.
In his efforts to get more women into his Commission he promised them higher profile jobs.
Limited though his powers are to choose his colleagues ‑ Mr Barroso called it a 'blind date' ‑ the President does now have discretion over the disposition of Commission portfolios.
Limited though his powers are to choose his colleagues ‑ Mr Barroso called it a 'blind date' ‑ the President does now have discretion over the disposition of Commission portfolios.
Article 217.2 TEC.
Article 217.2 TEC.
Although he does not have a free hand in the choice of his Commission, the Treaty of Nice gave the President the power both to appoint (and dismiss) Vice-Presidents and to insist on the resignation of any member of the Commission ‘after obtaining the approval of the college’.
Although he does not have a free hand in the choice of his Commission, the Treaty of Nice gave the President the power both to appoint (and dismiss) Vice-Presidents and to insist on the resignation of any member of the Commission ‘after obtaining the approval of the college’.
Article 217.3-4 TEC.
Article 217.3-4 TEC.
The Commission would decide such matters by simple majority.
The Commission would decide such matters by simple majority.
During the terms of office of both the Santer and Prodi Commissions, the question of the political accountability of individual Commissioners was raised on a number of occasions.
During the terms of office of both the Santer and Prodi Commissions, the question of the political accountability of individual Commissioners was raised on a number of occasions.
During the Barroso Commission hearings, the question of conflict of interest took on a fresh prominence.
During the Barroso Commission hearings, the question of conflict of interest took on a fresh prominence.
MEPs were understandably anxious to stress the need for candid disclosure of relevant information by all members and prospective members of the Commission.
MEPs were understandably anxious to stress the need for candid disclosure of relevant information by all members and prospective members of the Commission.
It is inevitable that each 'scandal' sparks calls for a further tightening of the rules.
It is inevitable that each 'scandal' sparks calls for a further tightening of the rules.
Despite the wide gap that exists in terms of political culture across the continent, European Parliamentary scrutiny of the Commission ‑ seen at its sharpest during the approval process ‑ is establishing EU norms of accountability that demand the highest standards of probity, integrity and candour.
Despite the wide gap that exists in terms of political culture across the continent, European Parliamentary scrutiny of the Commission ‑ seen at its sharpest during the approval process ‑ is establishing EU norms of accountability that demand the highest standards of probity, integrity and candour.
It is indeed perfectly proper that, when it comes to democracy, European integration settles on the highest common factors and not the lowest common denominators.
It is indeed perfectly proper that, when it comes to democracy, European integration settles on the highest common factors and not the lowest common denominators.
The Parliament's Rules of Procedure
The Parliament's Rules of Procedure
In 1993 Parliament introduced Rules of Procedure concerning the appointment of the Commission to reflect its new powers under the Treaty of Maastricht.
In 1993 Parliament introduced Rules of Procedure concerning the appointment of the Commission to reflect its new powers under the Treaty of Maastricht.
To accord with the very significant increase in Parliament's role and the Treaty amendments, its Rules of Procedure were altered in 1996, 1999 and 2002.
To accord with the very significant increase in Parliament's role and the Treaty amendments, its Rules of Procedure were altered in 1996, 1999 and 2002.
The relevant provisions are found in Rules 98 and 99.
The relevant provisions are found in Rules 98 and 99.
In the case of the election of Mr Barroso, the procedure in Rule 98 was followed to the letter, apart from the fact that the Council declined to take part in the July 2004 debate.
In the case of the election of Mr Barroso, the procedure in Rule 98 was followed to the letter, apart from the fact that the Council declined to take part in the July 2004 debate.
Rule 99, concerning the election of the rest of the Commission, lacks a certain precision with respect to the hearings.
Rule 99, concerning the election of the rest of the Commission, lacks a certain precision with respect to the hearings.
There is also an element of wishful thinking in Rule 99: one looks forward to the day when the whole Council participates in a Parliamentary debate.
There is also an element of wishful thinking in Rule 99: one looks forward to the day when the whole Council participates in a Parliamentary debate.
The call for the President to present the Commission's 'programme' also seems misplaced.
The call for the President to present the Commission's 'programme' also seems misplaced.
In practice, both Mr Barroso, like Mr Prodi before him waited until later to present his real work programme.
In practice, both Mr Barroso, like Mr Prodi before him waited until later to present his real work programme.
That must be sensible, and should be reflected correctly in the Parliament's Rules.
That must be sensible, and should be reflected correctly in the Parliament's Rules.
The hearings
The hearings
Auditions had first been held in 1994 and again in 1999.
Auditions had first been held in 1994 and again in 1999.
They were repeated in May 2004 for the ten new members of the enlarged Prodi Commission from the acceding states.
They were repeated in May 2004 for the ten new members of the enlarged Prodi Commission from the acceding states.
Between 27 September and 11 October 2004, the Parliament held auditions of all members of the Barroso team.
Between 27 September and 11 October 2004, the Parliament held auditions of all members of the Barroso team.
They were organised by the Parliament's Legislative Coordination service, a common service of DGs Internal Policies and External Policies under the auspices of the Conference of Committee Chairs (CPC).
They were organised by the Parliament's Legislative Coordination service, a common service of DGs Internal Policies and External Policies under the auspices of the Conference of Committee Chairs (CPC).
The Conference of Presidents became involved in the latter stages of the preparations.
The Conference of Presidents became involved in the latter stages of the preparations.
There were two main changes from past practice, to the layout of the room and to the form of the questioning.
There were two main changes from past practice, to the layout of the room and to the form of the questioning.
It was decided to have 'ping-pong' questions, with the candidate answering immediately, as well as to allow all members of each committee ‑ that is, all MEPs! ‑ the chance to ask a question.
It was decided to have 'ping-pong' questions, with the candidate answering immediately, as well as to allow all members of each committee ‑ that is, all MEPs! ‑ the chance to ask a question.
The CPC suggested, as a guideline, that each question and answer plus supplementary question and answer should take five minutes, and that speaking time should be divided up according to the D'Hondt formula used for plenary sessions rather than the more flexible (and meritocratic) custom of committee meetings.
The CPC suggested, as a guideline, that each question and answer plus supplementary question and answer should take five minutes, and that speaking time should be divided up according to the D'Hondt formula used for plenary sessions rather than the more flexible (and meritocratic) custom of committee meetings.
Such a large number of speakers obliged each of the hearings to be three hours long, a duration which was stuck to rigidly despite the fact that a number of auditions ran into the sand.
Such a large number of speakers obliged each of the hearings to be three hours long, a duration which was stuck to rigidly despite the fact that a number of auditions ran into the sand.
Despite a certain longueur , the fact that every MEP can become involved in a Commission hearing is thought to contribute to the cohesion of the Parliament at the start of a new mandate.
Despite a certain longueur , the fact that every MEP can become involved in a Commission hearing is thought to contribute to the cohesion of the Parliament at the start of a new mandate.
The oral hearings of the 24 candidates were organised by 18 parliamentary committees, often working in tandem with other committees where sectoral responsibilities over-lapped.
The oral hearings of the 24 candidates were organised by 18 parliamentary committees, often working in tandem with other committees where sectoral responsibilities over-lapped.
Three degrees of collaboration were permitted: a fully joint meeting, a partial joint meeting, or a subsidiary delegation.
Three degrees of collaboration were permitted: a fully joint meeting, a partial joint meeting, or a subsidiary delegation.
Liaison between committees was not however without its problems: where satisfactory agreement had not been reached there was a risk of fragmentation of the hearing.
Liaison between committees was not however without its problems: where satisfactory agreement had not been reached there was a risk of fragmentation of the hearing.
There was one regrettable exception to the agreed rule of one hearing per candidate as a result of a territorial dispute between the chairmen of the Civil Liberties and Legal Affairs Committees.
There was one regrettable exception to the agreed rule of one hearing per candidate as a result of a territorial dispute between the chairmen of the Civil Liberties and Legal Affairs Committees.
Each Commission nominee had to file for the Commission (but not the Parliament) a declaration on their financial and professional interests, which was then posted on the Commission website.
Each Commission nominee had to file for the Commission (but not the Parliament) a declaration on their financial and professional interests, which was then posted on the Commission website.
Although Commission-candidates are scrutinised for their financial interests, there is no kind of security screening comparable to that existing in most member states for newly appointed government ministers.
Although Commission-candidates are scrutinised for their financial interests, there is no kind of security screening comparable to that existing in most member states for newly appointed government ministers.
The lack of an EU level security apparatus means that the Commission would have to rely on disparate and lengthy national security clearance procedures.
The lack of an EU level security apparatus means that the Commission would have to rely on disparate and lengthy national security clearance procedures.
It has chosen not to do so.
It has chosen not to do so.
However, not all these declarations, which take the form of an annex to the Commission Code of Conduct, were made available to MEPs.
However, not all these declarations, which take the form of an annex to the Commission Code of Conduct, were made available to MEPs.
Prior to the oral hearings, each candidate was presented with a large number of written questions from the Parliament.
Prior to the oral hearings, each candidate was presented with a large number of written questions from the Parliament.
The Parliament's Rules of Procedure make no mention at all of the written questions, let alone their purpose, focus or volume.
The Parliament's Rules of Procedure make no mention at all of the written questions, let alone their purpose, focus or volume.
Answering the written questions engaged many Commission officials for some weeks.
Answering the written questions engaged many Commission officials for some weeks.
The direct involvement of the Commission candidates in this process was not always self-evident.
The direct involvement of the Commission candidates in this process was not always self-evident.
Moreover, it became obvious during the oral hearings that not every MEP had bothered to read the answers.
Moreover, it became obvious during the oral hearings that not every MEP had bothered to read the answers.
The questions were in two parts: 16 general questions asked of all the candidates, followed by an open number of policy specific questions.
The questions were in two parts: 16 general questions asked of all the candidates, followed by an open number of policy specific questions.
The general questions were too vague to be meaningful, and, at any rate, invoked carefully coordinated answers from the Commission; the policy questions often delved into a level of minute detail that was inappropriate at the outset of the mandate of the Commission and before the college had been able to formulate substantively its future work programme.
The general questions were too vague to be meaningful, and, at any rate, invoked carefully coordinated answers from the Commission; the policy questions often delved into a level of minute detail that was inappropriate at the outset of the mandate of the Commission and before the college had been able to formulate substantively its future work programme.
Although the CPC had tried to limit them, the number of policy questions differed widely per candidate, between half a dozen and almost 30.
Although the CPC had tried to limit them, the number of policy questions differed widely per candidate, between half a dozen and almost 30.
In any case, most of the committees had already begun to draft questions in July before the CPC took up the issue.
In any case, most of the committees had already begun to draft questions in July before the CPC took up the issue.
(An ex-post selection of questions that had already been voted on in the committees would have been a delicate task.)
(An ex-post selection of questions that had already been voted on in the committees would have been a delicate task.)
The Rules of Procedure are silent on the organisation, schedule, conduct and assessment of the hearings themselves.
The Rules of Procedure are silent on the organisation, schedule, conduct and assessment of the hearings themselves.
No objective criteria or special procedures are laid down.
No objective criteria or special procedures are laid down.
No guidance is given to committees as to what they should be looking for in their Commission candidate in terms of the balance between political skill, professional experience or technical knowledge.
No guidance is given to committees as to what they should be looking for in their Commission candidate in terms of the balance between political skill, professional experience or technical knowledge.
There is no systematic mechanism for assessing their responses to general political questions.
There is no systematic mechanism for assessing their responses to general political questions.
Nothing is said about the declaration of financial and other interests over and above what the Commission itself requires.
Nothing is said about the declaration of financial and other interests over and above what the Commission itself requires.
Worst of all, there is no provision for a coordinated procedure to ensure the horizontal scrutiny of the result of the hearings.
Worst of all, there is no provision for a coordinated procedure to ensure the horizontal scrutiny of the result of the hearings.
Unsurprisingly, the conduct of the oral sessions was variable.
Unsurprisingly, the conduct of the oral sessions was variable.
Some chairmen watched the clock and restricted each question and answer to five minutes regardless of content.
Some chairmen watched the clock and restricted each question and answer to five minutes regardless of content.
Such a mechanistic approach succeeded only in bringing a breathless superficiality to the proceedings.
Such a mechanistic approach succeeded only in bringing a breathless superficiality to the proceedings.
Other chairmen succeeded in grouping questions by theme and in preventing any single Member asking two or three large complex questions at once.
Other chairmen succeeded in grouping questions by theme and in preventing any single Member asking two or three large complex questions at once.
Some also allowed a more political dialogue to develop, and encouraged supplementary questions.
Some also allowed a more political dialogue to develop, and encouraged supplementary questions.
Several Members, however, abused the notion of supplementary questions by raising a completely new topic.
Several Members, however, abused the notion of supplementary questions by raising a completely new topic.
Certain hearings became unduly dominated by questions about national politics from fellow nationals to the detriment of an overall European perspective.
Certain hearings became unduly dominated by questions about national politics from fellow nationals to the detriment of an overall European perspective.
Others pursued personal answers to tough ethical questions, exposing thereby the very great cultural differences that co-exist within the EU.
Others pursued personal answers to tough ethical questions, exposing thereby the very great cultural differences that co-exist within the EU.