Document stages in plenary
Document selected : O-000092/2016

Texts tabled :

O-000092/2016 (B8-0715/2016)

Debates :

PV 04/10/2016 - 17
CRE 04/10/2016 - 17

Votes :

Texts adopted :

Parliamentary questions
PDF 103kWORD 16k
20 June 2016
Question for oral answer O-000092/2016
to the Council
Rule 128
Claude Moraes, on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

 Subject: European Public Prosecutor's Office and Eurojust
 Answer in plenary 

The Commission presented a proposal for a Council regulation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) (COM(2013)0534) on 17 July 2013, a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law (the ‘PIF Directive’) (COM(2012)0363) on 11 July 2012, and a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) on 17 July 2013 (COM(2013)0535).

1. Can the Council indicate the latest state of play, any outstanding issues and the expected future timeline regarding the adoption of these proposals, especially given that they are interlinked?

2. Does the Council agree with Parliament that, since the PIF Directive would stipulate the criminal offences for which the EPPO would be competent, that directive must be adopted before the EPPO Regulation?

3. Can the Council provide Parliament with information on the financial and practical impact of the new EPPO (following the changes made to the Commission text by the Council), including the impact on Eurojust’s budget?

4. Can the Council explain the operational, organisational and administrative links between the two bodies, and provide information on the extent of national parliaments’ involvement?

Legal notice