Index 
Texts adopted
Wednesday, 11 February 2015 - StrasbourgFinal edition
Safeguard measures provided for in the Agreement with Iceland ***I
 Measures concerning anti-dumping and anti-subsidy matters ***I
 Combined effect of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures with safeguard measures ***I
 Common rules for imports ***I
 Common rules for exports ***I
 The accession of Gabon to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 The accession of Andorra to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 The accession of Seychelles to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 The accession of the Russian Federation to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 The accession of Albania to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 The accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 The accession of Morocco to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 The accession of Armenia to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
 Verification of credentials
 Cross-border exchange of information on road safety related traffic offences ***I
 Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal ***
 US Senate report on the use of torture by the CIA
 Anti-terrorism measures
 Renewal of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum
 Country of origin labelling for meat in processed foods
 The work of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly

Safeguard measures provided for in the Agreement with Iceland ***I
PDF 212kWORD 50k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the safeguard measures provided for in the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Iceland (codified text) (COM(2014)0308 – C8-0011/2014 – 2014/0160(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0015A8-0031/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure – codification)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0308),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0011/2014),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 10 December 2014(1),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts(2),

–  having regard to Rules 103 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0031/2014),

A.  whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance;

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2015 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2015/... of the European Parliament and of the Council on the safeguard measures provided for in the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Iceland (codification)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2015/475.)

(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.
(2) OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.


Measures concerning anti-dumping and anti-subsidy matters ***I
PDF 214kWORD 50k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the measures that the Union may take following a report adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body concerning anti-dumping and anti-subsidy matters (codified text) (COM(2014)0317 – C8-0017/2014 – 2014/0163(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0016A8-0033/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure – codification)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0317),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0017/2014),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 10 December 2014(1),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts(2),

–  having regard to Rules 103 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0033/2014),

A.  whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance;

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2015 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2015/... of the European Parliament and of the Council on the measures that the Union may take following a report adopted by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body concerning anti-dumping and anti-subsidy matters (codification)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2015/476.)

(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.
(2) OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.


Combined effect of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures with safeguard measures ***I
PDF 212kWORD 50k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on measures that the Union may take in relation to the combined effect of anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures with safeguard measures (codified text) (COM(2014)0318 – C8-0016/2014 – 2014/0164(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0017A8-0032/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure – codification)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0318),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0016/2014),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  after consulting the European Economic and Social Committee,

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts(1),

–  having regard to Rules 103 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0032/2014),

A.  whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance;

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2015 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2015/... of the European Parliament and of the Council on measures that the Union may take in relation to the combined effect of anti-dumping or anti-subsidy measures with safeguard measures (codification)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2015/477.)

(1) OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.


Common rules for imports ***I
PDF 212kWORD 50k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for imports (codified text) (COM(2014)0321 – C8-0012/2014 – 2014/0166(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0018A8-0040/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure – codification)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0321),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0012/2014),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 10 December 2014(1),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts(2),

–  having regard to Rules 103 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0040/2014),

A.  whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance;

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2015 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2015/... of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for imports (codification)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2015/478.)

(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.
(2) OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.


Common rules for exports ***I
PDF 212kWORD 49k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for exports (codified text) (COM(2014)0322 – C8-0013/2014 – 2014/0167(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0019A8-0035/2014

(Ordinary legislative procedure – codification)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0322),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 207(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0013/2014),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 10 December 2014(1),

–  having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 December 1994 - Accelerated working method for official codification of legislative texts(2),

–  having regard to Rules 103 and 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0035/2014),

A.  whereas, according to the Consultative Working Party of the legal services of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, the proposal in question contains a straightforward codification of the existing texts without any change in their substance;

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2015 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2015/... of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for exports (codification)

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2015/479.)

(1) Not yet published in the Official Journal.
(2) OJ C 102, 4.4.1996, p. 2.


The accession of Gabon to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 205kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of Gabon to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0904 – C8-0263/2014 – 2011/0441(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0020A8-0007/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0904),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0263/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0007/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Gabon.


The accession of Andorra to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 204kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of Andorra to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0908 – C8-0264/2014 – 2011/0443(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0021A8-0004/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0908),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0264/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0004/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Andorra.


The accession of Seychelles to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 203kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of Seychelles to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0909 – C8-0265/2014 – 2011/0444(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0022A8-0006/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0909),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0265/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0006/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Seychelles.


The accession of the Russian Federation to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 204kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of the Russian Federation to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0911 – C8-0266/2014 – 2011/0447(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0023A8-0008/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0911),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0266/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0008/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Russian Federation.


The accession of Albania to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 204kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of Albania to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0912 – C8-0262/2014 – 2011/0448(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0024A8-0002/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0912),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0262/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0002/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Albania.


The accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 204kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of Singapore to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0915 – C8-0267/2014 – 2011/0450(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0025A8-0003/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0915),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0267/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0003/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Singapore.


The accession of Morocco to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 204kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of Morocco to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0916 – C8-0268/2014 – 2011/0451(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0026A8-0005/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0916),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0268/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0005/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Morocco.


The accession of Armenia to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction *
PDF 204kWORD 46k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a Council decision on the declaration of acceptance by the Member States, in the interest of the European Union, of the accession of Armenia to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (COM(2011)0917 – C8-0269/2014 – 2011/0452(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0027A8-0009/2015

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2011)0917),

–  having regard to Article 38, fourth paragraph, of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction,

–  having regard to Article 81(3) and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (b), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C8‑0269/2014),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Court of Justice of 14 October 2014,

–  having regard to Rules 59 and 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0009/2015),

1.  Approves the proposal for a Council decision and approves the acceptance of the accession;

2.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of Armenia.


Verification of credentials
PDF 243kWORD 105k
Decision
Annex
European Parliament decision of 11 February 2015 on the verification of credentials (2014/2165(REG))
P8_TA(2015)0028A8-0013/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage(1),

–  having regard to its decision of 28 September 2005 adopting the Statute for Members of the European Parliament(2), in particular Articles 2(1) and 3(1) thereof,

–  having regard to Council Directive 93/109/EC of 6 December 1993 laying down detailed arrangements for the exercise of the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament for citizens of the Union residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals(3),

–  having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 7 July 2005 and 30 April 2009(4),

–  having regard to Rules 3, 4, and 11 of and Annex I to its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the official notifications from the competent authorities of the Member States of the results of the election to the European Parliament,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0013/2015),

A.  whereas Article 7(1) and (2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 clearly set out the offices that are incompatible with the office of Member of the European Parliament;

B.  whereas under Rule 11 of and Annex I to the Rules of Procedure Members are required to make a detailed declaration of their professional activities and any other remunerated functions or activities;

C.  whereas all of the Member States have notified Parliament of the names of the elected candidates, but some of them have not yet forwarded – or have done so with a delay – the lists of any substitutes, together with their ranking in accordance with the results of the vote, as required under Rule 3(4) of the Rules of Procedure;

D.  whereas in some cases Member States provided partial notification of elected candidates and forwarded further details subsequently;

E.  whereas in some Member States objections to the election of some Members of the European Parliament are being considered in accordance with national legislation and whereas these procedures could result in the annulment of the election of the Members concerned;

F.  whereas, pursuant to Article 12 of the Act of 20 September 1976, Parliament is required to rule on any disputes concerning the validity of the mandate of its Members only where these relate to breaches of the provisions of the above‑mentioned Act, and not in the case of breaches of the national electoral provisions to which the Act refers;

G.  whereas in order to verify the credentials of its Members in accordance with Article 12 of the Act of 1976, Parliament must take note of the results of the election as officially declared by the competent authorities of the Member States, with no possibility for discretion in the matter; whereas, however, this provision does not prevent Parliament from reporting, where appropriate, potential cases of incompatibility between the national electoral legislation, on which the results are based, and EU law;

H.  whereas the nationals of certain Member States who have been living in another country for a given period of time can be deprived of the right to vote in their home Member State (disenfranchisement); whereas in some cases this may also entail the deprivation of the right to stand as a candidate;

I.  whereas the UK Electoral Commission has reported that a number of nationals of other Member States who are resident in the UK could not exercise their right to vote at the last European election;

1.  Declares valid, subject to any decisions by the competent authorities of Member States in which the election results have been disputed, the mandate of the Members of the European Parliament listed in the annex to this decision whose election has been notified by the competent national authorities and who have made the written declarations required on the basis of Article 7(1) and (2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 and Annex I to the Rules of Procedure;

2.  Repeats its request to the competent national authorities not only promptly to notify it of all the names of the elected candidates but also to forward the names of any substitutes, together with their ranking in accordance with the results of the vote;

3.  Calls on the competent authorities of the Member States to complete without delay the examination of the disputes referred to them and to notify Parliament of the results;

4.  Considers that disenfranchisement is tantamount to punishing nationals who have exercised the right of free movement within the EU (Article 20(2)(a) TFEU), to denying them their right to vote and to stand as candidates in elections to the European Parliament in their Member State of residence (Article 20(2)(b) TFEU) and to violating the principle of direct universal suffrage (Article 14(3) TEU and Article 1(3) of the Act of 1976); takes the view that under no circumstances may disenfranchisement apply to European elections and calls on the Commission to ensure that none of the Member States provides for that possibility;

5.  Calls on Member States to ensure that the registration formalities relating to the participation of nationals of other Member States in the European elections, whether as voters or as candidates, are simplified, in particular by removing unnecessary administrative barriers so as to make the rights referred to under Article 20(2)(a) and (b) TFEU effective; requests that the Commission ensure that the practices of the Member States comply with EU law;

6.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Commission and the competent national authorities and the parliaments of the Member States.

ANNEX

List of Members of the European Parliament whose mandate is declared valid

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Belgium (21 Members)

ANNEMANS Gerolf

ARENA Maria

ARIMONT Pascal

BAYET Hugues

BELET Ivo

DE BACKER Philippe

DEMESMAEKER Mark

DEPREZ Gérard

IDE Louis*

LAMBERTS Philippe

LOONES Sander**

MICHEL Louis

NEYTS-UYTTEBROECK Annemie***

RIES Frédérique

ROLIN Claude

STAES Bart

STEVENS Helga

TARABELLA Marc

THYSSEN Marianne****

VAN BREMPT Kathleen

VANDENKENDELAERE Tom*****

VAN OVERTVELDT Johan******

VERHOFSTADT Guy

(*) Mr Louis IDE’s mandate ended on 19 December 2014.

(**) Mandate valid with effect from 14 October 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Sander LOONES to replace Mr Johan VAN OVERTVELDT.

(***) Ms Annemie NEYTS-UYTTEBROECK’s mandate ended on 1 January 2015.

(****) Ms Marianne THYSSEN’s mandate ended on 1 November 2014.

(*****) Mandate valid with effect from 6 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Tom VANDENKENDELAERE to replace Ms Marianne THYSSEN.

(******) Mr Johan VAN OVERTVELDT's mandate ended on 11 October 2014.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Bulgaria (17 Members)

ALI Nedzhmi

BAREKOV Nikolay

DONCHEV Tomislav*

DZHAMBAZKI Angel

GABRIEL Mariya

HYUSMENOVA Filiz Hakaeva

IOTOVA Iliana Malinova

KOVATCHEV Andrey

KYUCHYUK Ilhan

MALINOV Svetoslav Hristov

MIHAYLOVA Iskra

NEKOV Momchil

NOVAKOV Andrey **

PAUNOVA Eva

PIRINSKI Georgi

RADEV Emil

STANISHEV Sergey

URUTCHEV Vladimir

(*) Mr Tomislav DONCHEV’s mandate ended on 7 November 2014.

(**) Mandate valid with effect from 24 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Andrey NOVAKOV to replace Mr Tomislav DONCHEV.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Czech Republic (21 Members)

Charanzová Dita

Dlabajová Martina

Ježek Petr

Keller Jan

Konečná Kateřina

Mach Petr

Maštálka Jiří

Niedermayer Ludek

Poc Pavel

Poche Miroslav

Polčák Stanislav

Pospíšil Jiří

Ransdorf Miloslav

Sehnalová Olga

Šojdrová Michaela

Štětina Jaromír

Svoboda Pavel

Telička Pavel

Tošenovský Evžen

Zahradil Jan

Zdechovský Tomáš

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Denmark (13 Members)

AUKEN Margrete

BENDTSEN Bendt

CHRISTENSEN Ole

DOHRMANN Jørn

KARI Rina Ronja

KARLSSON Rikke

KOFOD Jeppe

MESSERSCHMIDT Morten

PETERSEN Morten Helveg

ROHDE Jens

SCHALDEMOSE Christel

TØRNӔS Ulla

VISTISEN Anders Primdahl

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Germany (96 Members)

ALBRECHT Jan Philipp

BALZ Burkhard

BÖGE Reimer

BROK Elmar

BUCHNER Klaus

BULLMANN Udo

BÜTIKOFER Reinhard

CASPARY Daniel

COLLIN-LANGEN Birgit

CRAMER Michael

DE MASI Fabio

DESS Albert

ECK Stefan

EHLER Christian

ERNST Cornelia

ERTUG Ismail

FERBER Markus

FLECKENSTEIN Knut

FLORENZ Karl-Heinz

GAHLER Michael

GEBHARDT Evelyne

GEIER Jens

GERICKE Arne

GIEGOLD Sven

GIESEKE Jens

GRÄSSLE Ingeborg

GROOTE Matthias

HÄNDEL Thomas

HARMS Rebecca

HÄUSLING Martin

HENKEL Hans-Olaf

HEUBUCH Maria

HOFFMANN Iris

HOHLMEIER Monika

JAHR Peter

KAMMEREVERT Petra

KAUFMANN Sylvia-Yvonne

KELLER Ska

KOCH Dieter-Lebrecht

KÖLMEL Bernd

KÖSTER Dietmar

KREHL Constanze Angela

KUHN Werner

LAMBSDORFF Alexander Graf

LANGE Bernd

LANGEN Werner

LEINEN Jo

LIESE Peter

LIETZ Arne

LINS Norbert

LOCHBIHLER Barbara

LÖSING Sabine

LUCKE Bernd

McALLISTER David

MANN Thomas

MEISSNER Gesine

MELIOR Susanne

MICHELS Martina

MÜLLER Ulrike

NEUSER Norbert

NIEBLER Angelika

NOICHL Maria

PIEPER Markus

PRETZELL Marcus

PREUSS Gabriele

QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL Godelieve

REDA Julia

REINTKE Theresa

REUL Herbert

RODUST Ulrike

SCHOLZ Helmut

SCHULZ Martin

SCHULZE Sven

SCHUSTER Joachim

SCHWAB Andreas

SIMON Peter

SIPPEL Birgit

SOMMER Renate

SONNEBORN Martin

STARBATTY Joachim

STEINRUCK Jutta

von STORCH Beatrix

THEURER Michael

TREBESIUS Ulrike

TRÜPEL Helga

VERHEYEN Sabine

VOIGT Udo

VOSS Axel

WEBER Manfred

von WEIZSÄCKER Jakob

WERNER Martina

WESTPHAL Kerstin

WIELAND Rainer

WINKLER Hermann

ZELLER Joachim

ZIMMER Gabriele

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Estonia (6 Members)

ANSIP Andrus*

KALLAS Kaja

KELAM Tunne

LAURISTIN Marju

PAET Urmas**

TARAND Indrek

TOOM Yana

(*) Mr Andrus ANSIP’s mandate ended on 1 November 2014.

(**) Mandate valid with effect from 3 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Urmas PAET to replace Mr Andrus ANSIP.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Ireland (11 Members)

BOYLAN Lynn

CARTY Matt

CHILDERS Nessa

CLUNE Deirdre

CROWLEY Brian

FLANAGAN Luke “Ming”

HARKIN Marian

HAYES Brian

KELLY Seán

McGUINNESS Mairead

NÍ RIADA Liadh

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Greece (21 Members)

ANDROULAKIS Nikos

CHRYSOGONOS Konstantinos

EPITIDEIOS Georgios

FOUNTOULIS Lampros

GLEZOS Emmanouil

GRAMMATIKAKIS Giorgos

KAILI Eva

KATROUGALOS Georgios*

KEFALOGIANNIS Manolis

KUNEVA Kostadinka

KYRKOS Miltiadis

KYRTSOS Georgios

MARIAS Notis

PAPADAKIS Konstantinos

PAPADIMOULIS Dimitrios

SAKORAFA Sofia

SPYRAKI Maria

SYNADINOS Eleytherios

VOZEMBERG Elissavet

ZAGORAKIS Theodoros

ZARIANOPOULOS Sotirios

(*) Mr Georgios KATROUGALOS’s mandate ended on 27 January 2015.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Spain (54 Members)

AGUILERA GARCÍA Clara Eugenia

ALBIOL GUZMÁN Marina

ARIAS CAÑETE Miguel*

AYALA SENDER Inés

AYUSO Pilar

BECERRA BASTERRECHEA Beatriz

BILBAO BARANDICA Izaskun

BLANCO LÓPEZ José

CABEZÓN RUIZ Soledad

CALVET CHAMBON Enrique**

COUSO PERMUY Javier***

del CASTILLO VERA Pilar

de GRANDES PASCUAL Luis

DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA

CONSUEGRA Agustín

ECHENIQUE ROBBA Pablo

ESTARÀS FERRAGUT Rosa

FERNÁNDEZ ÁLVAREZ Jonás

FISAS AYXELÀ Santiago

GAMBÚS Francesc

GARCÍA PÉREZ Iratxe

GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider

GIRAUTA VIDAL Juan Carlos

GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS Tania****

GONZÁLEZ PONS Esteban

GUERRERO SALOM Enrique

GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO Sergio

HERRANZ GARCÍA Esther

IGLESIAS TURRIÓN Pablo

ITURGAIZ Carlos*****

JÁUREGUI ATONDO Ramón

JIMÉNEZ-BECERRIL BARRIO Teresa

JIMÉNEZ VILLAREJO Carlos******

JUARISTI ABAUNZ Iosu Mirena

LOPE FONTAGNÉ Verónica

LÓPEZ AGUILAR Juan Fernando

LÓPEZ BERMEJO Paloma

LÓPEZ FERNÁNDEZ Javier

LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE Antonio

MARAGALL Ernest

MATO ADROVER Gabriel

MAURA BARANDIARÁN Fernando

MEYER Willy*******

MILLÁN MON Francisco José

NART Javier

PAGAZAURTUNDÚA RUIZ María Teresa

RODRIGUEZ-RUBIO VÁZQUEZ Maria Teresa

SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY Lola

SEBASTIÀ TALAVERA Jordi

SENRA RODRÍGUEZ María Lidia

SOSA WAGNER Francisco********

TERRICABRAS Josep-Maria

TREMOSA i BALCELLS Ramon

URTASUN Ernest

VALCÁRCEL SISO Ramón Luis

VALENCIANO MARTÍNEZ-OROZCO Elena

VALLINA DE LA NOVAL Ángela Rosa

ZALBA BIDEGAIN Pablo

(*) Mr Miguel ARIAS CAÑETE’s mandate ended on 1 November 2014.

(**) Mandate valid with effect from 20 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Enrique CALVET CHAMBON to replace Mr Francisco SOSA WAGNER.

(***) Mandate valid with effect from 15 July 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of M Javier COUSO PERMUY to replace Mr Willy MEYER.

(****) Mandate valid with effect from 11 September 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Ms Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS to replace Mr Carlos JIMÉNEZ VILLAREJO.

(*****)Mandate valid with effect from 6 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Carlos ITURGAIZ to replace Mr Miguel ARIAS CAÑETE.

(******) Mr Carlos JIMÉNEZ VILLAREJO's mandate ended on 1 August 2014.

(*******) Mr Willy MEYER's mandate ended on 10 July 2014.

(********) Mr Francisco SOSA WAGNER's mandate ended on 20 October 2014.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

France (74 Members)

ALIOT Louis

ALLIOT-MARIE Michèle

ANDRIEU Eric

ARNAUTU Marie-Christine

ARTHUIS Jean

BALAS Guillaume

BAY Nicolas

BERÈS Pervenche

BERGERON Joëlle

BILDE Dominique

BOUTONNET Marie-Christine

BOVÉ José

BRIOIS Steeve

CADEC Alain

CAVADA Jean-Marie

CHAUPRADE Aymeric

DANJEAN Arnaud

DANTIN Michel

DATI Rachida

DELAHAYE Angélique

DELLI Karima

DENANOT Jean-Paul

de SARNEZ Marielle

D'ORNANO Mireille

DURAND Pascal

FERRAND Edouard

GODDYN SYLVIE

GOLLNISCH Bruno

GOULARD Sylvie

GRIESBECK Nathalie

GROSSETÊTE Françoise

GUILLAUME Sylvie

HORTEFEUX Brice

JADOT Yannick

JALKH Jean-François

JOLY Eva

JOULAUD Marc

JUVIN Philippe

LAMASSOURE Alain

LAVRILLEUX Jérôme

LEBRETON Gilles

LE GRIP Constance

LE HYARIC Patrick

LE PEN Jean-Marie

LE PEN Marine

LOISEAU Philippe

MANSCOUR Louis-Joseph

MARTIN Dominique

MARTIN Edouard

MAUREL Emmanuel

MÉLENCHON Jean-Luc

MELIN Joelle

MONOT Bernard

MONTEL Sophie

MORANO Nadine

MORIN-CHARTIER Elisabeth

MUSELIER Renaud

OMARJEE Younous

PARGNEAUX Gilles

PEILLON Vincent

PHILIPPOT Florian

PONGA Maurice

PROUST Franck

REVAULT D'ALLONNES BONNEFOY Christine

RIQUET Dominique

RIVASI Michèle

ROCHEFORT Robert

ROZIÈRE Virginie

SAÏFI Tokia

SANDER Anne

SCHAFFHAUSER Jean-Luc

THOMAS Isabelle

TROSZCZYNSKI Mylène

VERGIAT Marie-Christine

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Italy (73 Members)

ADINOLFI Isabella

AFFRONTE Marco

AGEA Laura

AIUTO Daniela

BEGHIN Tiziana

BENIFEI Brando Maria

BETTINI Goffredo Maria

BIZZOTTO Mara

BONAFÈ Simona

BORGHEZIO Mario

BORRELLI Davide

BRESSO Mercedes

BRIANO Renata

BUONANNO Gianluca

CAPUTO Nicola

CASTALDO Fabio Massimo

CESA Lorenzo

CHINNICI Caterina

CICU Salvatore

CIRIO Alberto

COFFERATI Sergio Gaetano

COMI Lara

CORRAO Ignazio

COSTA Silvia

COZZOLINO Andrea

D'AMATO Rosa

DANTI Nicola

DE CASTRO Paolo

DE MONTE Isabella

DORFMANN Herbert

EVI Eleonora

FERRARA Laura

FITTO Raffaele

FONTANA Lorenzo*

FORENZA Eleonora

GARDINI Elisabetta

GASBARRA Enrico

GENTILE Elena

GIUFFRIDA Michela

GUALTIERI Roberto

KYENGE Kashetu

LA VIA Giovanni

MALTESE Curzio

MARTUSCIELLO Fulvio

MATERA Barbara

MOI Giulia

MORETTI Alessandra**

MORGANO Luigi

MOSCA Alessia Maria

MUSSOLINI Alessandra

PANZERI Pier Antonio

PAOLUCCI Massimo

PATRICIELLO Aldo

PEDICINI Piernicola

PICIERNO Giuseppina

PITTELLA Gianni

POGLIESE Salvatore Domenico

SALINI Massimiliano

SALVINI Matteo

SASSOLI David-Maria

SCHLEIN Elena Ethel

SERNAGIOTTO Remo

SORU Renato

SPINELLI Barbara

TAJANI Antonio

TAMBURRANO Dario

TOIA Patrizia

TOSI Flavio***

TOTI Giovanni

VALLI Marco

VIOTTI Daniele

ZANNI Marco

ZANONATO Flavio

ZULLO Marco

(*) Mandate valid with effect from 11 July 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Lorenzo FONTANA to replace Mr Flavio TOSI.

(**) Ms Alessandra MORETTI’s mandate ended on 2 February 2015.

(***) Mr Flavio TOSI's mandate ended on 9 July 2014.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Cyprus (6 Members)

CHRISTOFOROU Lefteris*

HADJIGEORGIOU Takis

MAVRIDES Costas

PAPADAKIS Demetris

STYLIANIDES Christos**

SYLIKIOTIS Neoklis

THEOCHAROUS Eleni

(*) Mandate valid with effect from 3 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU to replace Mr Christos STYLIANIDES.

(**) Mr Christos STYLIANIDES’s mandate ended on 1 November 2014.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Latvia (8 Members)

DOMBROVSKIS Valdis*

GRIGULE Iveta

KALNIETE Sandra

KARIŅŠ Krišjānis

MAMIKINS Andrejs

PABRIKS Artis

VAIDERE Inese**

ŽDANOKA Tatjana

ZĪLE Roberts

(*) Mr Valdis DOMBROVSKIS’s mandate ended on 1 November 2014.

(**) Mandate valid with effect from 1 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Ms Inese VAIDERE to replace Mr Valdis DOMBROVSKIS.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Lithuania (11 Members)

AUŠTREVIČIUS Petras

BALČYTIS Zigmantas

BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ Vilija

GUOGA Antanas

LANDSBERGIS Gabrielius

MAZURONIS Valentinas

PAKSAS Rolandas

ROPÉ Bronis

SAUDARGAS Algirdas

TOMAŠEVSKI Valdemar

USPASKICH Viktor

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Luxembourg (6 Members)

BACH Georges

DELVAUX-STEHRES Mady

ENGEL Frank

GOERENS Charles

REDING Viviane

TURMES Claude

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Croatia (11 Members)

BORZAN Biljana

JAKOVČIĆ Ivan

MALETIĆ Ivana

PETIR Marijana

PICULA Tonino

PLENKOVIĆ Andrej

RADOŠ Jozo

ŠKRLEC Davor

STIER Davor Ivo

ŠUICA Dubravka

TOMAŠIĆ Ruža

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Hungary (21 Members)

BALCZÓ Zoltán

BOCSKOR Andrea

DELI Andor

DEUTSCH Tamás

ERDŐS Norbert

GÁL Kinga

GÁLL-PELCZ Ildikó

GYÜRK András

HÖLVÉNYI György

JÁVOR Benedek

KÓSA Ádám

KOVÁCS Béla

MESZERICS Tamás

MOLNÁR Csaba

MORVAI Krisztina

NIEDERMÜLLER Péter

SCHÖPFLIN György

SZÁJER József

SZANYI Tibor Jenő

TŐKÉS László

UJHELYI István

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Malta (6 Members)

CASA David

COMODINI CACHIA Therese

DALLI Miriam

METSOLA Roberta

MIZZI Marlene

SANT Alfred

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Netherlands (26 Members)

van BAALEN Johannes Cornelis

BELDER Bas

van de CAMP Wim

van DALEN Peter

EICKHOUT Bas

GERBRANDY Gerben-Jan

de GRAAFF Marcel

HAZEKAMP Antje Anna Helena

HUITEMA Jan

JANSEN Hans

de JONG Cornelis

JONGERIUS Agnes

de LANGE Esther

LENAERS Jeroen

MAEIJER Vicky

van MILTENBURG Matthijs

MINEUR Anne-Marie

van NIEUWENHUIZEN-WIJBENGA Cora

van NISTELROOIJ Lambert

PIRI Kati

SARGENTINI Judith

SCHAAKE Marietje

SCHREIJER-PIERIK Annie

STUGER Olaf

TANG Paul

in 't VELD Sophia

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Austria (18 Members)

BECKER Heinz K.

FREUND Eugen

KADENBACH Karin

KAPPEL Barbara

KARAS Othmar

KÖSTINGER Elisabeth

LEICHTFRIED Jörg

LUNACEK Ulrike

MAYER Georg

MLINAR Angelika

OBERMAYR Franz

REGNER Evelyn

REIMON Michel

RÜBIG Paul

SCHMIDT Claudia

VANA Monika

VILIMSKY Harald

WEIDENHOLZER Josef

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Poland (51 Members)

BONI Michał

BUZEK Jerzy

CZARNECKI Ryszard

DUDA Andrzej Sebastian

FOTYGA Anna Elżbieta

GERINGER de OEDENBERG Lidia Joanna

GIEREK Adam

GOSIEWSKA Beata Barbara

GRÓBARCZYK Marek Józef

GRZYB Andrzej

HETMAN Krzysztof

HÜBNER Danuta Maria

IWASZKIEWICZ Robert Jarosław

JACKIEWICZ Dawid Bohdan

JAZŁOWIECKA Danuta

JUREK Marek

KALINOWSKI Jarosław

KARSKI Karol Adam

KORWIN-MIKKE Janusz Ryszard

KOZŁOWSKA-RAJEWICZ Agnieszka

KRASNODĘBSKI Zdzisław Marek

KUDRYCKA Barbara

KUŹMIUK Zbigniew Krzysztof

LEGUTKO Ryszard Antoni

LEWANDOWSKI Janusz

LIBERADZKI Bogusław

ŁUKACIJEWSKA Elżbieta Katarzyna

ŁYBACKA Krystyna

MARUSIK Michał

OLBRYCHT Jan

OŻÓG Stanisław

PIECHA Bolesław Grzegorz

PIOTROWSKI Mirosław

PITERA Julia

PLURA Marek Mirosław

PORĘBA Tomasz Piotr

ROSATI Dariusz

SARYUSZ-WOLSKI Jacek

SIEKIERSKI Czesław Adam

SZEJNFELD Adam

THUN UND HOHENSTEIN Róża Gräfin von

UJAZDOWSKI Kazimierz Michał

WAŁĘSA Jarosław Leszek

WENTA Bogdan Brunon

WIŚNIEWSKA Jadwiga

WOJCIECHOWSKI Janusz

ZDROJEWSKI Bogdan Andrzej

ZEMKE Janusz Władysław

ZŁOTOWSKI Kosma Tadeusz

ZWIEFKA Tadeusz

ŻÓŁTEK Stanisław Józef

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Portugal (21 Members)

ASSIS Francisco

COELHO Carlos

FARIA José Inácio

FERNANDES José Manuel

FERREIRA Elisa

FERREIRA João

GOMES Ana

MARINHO E PINTO António

MATIAS Marisa

MELO Nuno

MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR Cláudia

RANGEL Paulo

RIBEIRO Sofia

RODRIGUES Liliana

RODRIGUES Maria João

RUAS Fernando

SERRÃO SANTOS Ricardo

SILVA PEREIRA Pedro

VIEGAS Miguel

ZORRINHO Carlos

ZUBER Inês Cristina

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Romania (32 Members)

BOŞTINARU Victor

BUDA Daniel

BUŞOI Cristian Silviu

CREŢU Corina*

CRISTEA Andi-Lucian

DĂNCILĂ Vasilica Viorica

DIACONU Mircea

DRĂGHICI Damian

FRUNZULICĂ Doru-Claudian

GRAPINI Maria

HELLVIG Eduard-Raul

IVAN Cătălin Sorin

MACOVEI Monica Luisa

MĂNESCU Ramona Nicole

MARINESCU Marian-Jean

MOISĂ Ionel-Sorin

MUREȘAN Siegfried Vasile

NEGRESCU Victor

NICA Dan

NICOLAI Norica

PAŞCU Ioan Mircea

PAVEL Emilian**

PREDA Cristian Dan

REBEGA Constantin-Laurențiu

SÂRBU Daciana Octavia

SÓGOR Csaba

STOLOJAN Theodor Dumitru

TĂNĂSESCU Claudiu Ciprian

TAPARDEL Ana-Claudia

UNGUREANU Traian

VĂLEAN Adina-Ioana

WEBER Renate

WINKLER Iuliu

(*) Ms Corina CREŢU’s mandate ended on 1 November 2014.

(**) Mandate valid with effect from 1 November 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Mr Emilian PAVEL to replace Ms Corina CREŢU.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Slovenia (8 Members)

BOGOVIČ Franc

FAJON Tanja

PETERLE Alojz

ŠOLTES Igor

ŠULIN Patricija

TOMC Romana

VAJGL Ivo

ZVER Milan

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Slovakia (13 Members)

CSÁKY Pál

FLAŠIKOVÁ BEŇOVÁ Monika

KUKAN Eduard

MAŇKA Vladimír

MIKOLÁŠIK Miroslav

NAGY József

SMOLKOVÁ Monika

ŠKRIPEK Branislav

ŠTEFANEC Ivan

SULÍK Richard

ZÁBORSKÁ Anna

ZALA Boris

ŽITŇANSKÁ Jana

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Finland (13 Members)

HALLA-AHO Jussi

HAUTALA Heidi

JAAKONSAARI Liisa

JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli

KUMPULA-NATRI Miapetra

KYLLÖNEN Merja

PIETIKÄINEN Sirpa

REHN Olli

SARVAMAA Petri

TERHO Sampo

TORVALDS Nils

VÄYRYNEN Paavo

VIRKKUNEN Henna

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

Sweden (20 Members)

ADAKTUSSON Lars

ANDERSSON Max

BJÖRK Malin

CEBALLOS Bodil

CORAZZA BILDT Anna Maria

ENGSTRÖM Linnéa*

ERIKSSON Peter

FEDERLEY Fredrick

FJELLNER Christofer

GUTELAND Jytte

HEDH Anna

HÖKMARK Gunnar

LÖVIN Isabella**

LUDVIGSSON Olle

LUNDGREN Peter

NILSSON Jens

PAULSEN Marit

POST Soraya

ULVSKOG Marita

WIKSTRÖM Cecilia

WINBERG Kristina

(*) Mandate valid with effect from 8 October 2014, date of the notification by the competent national authority of the election of Ms Linnéa ENGSTRÖM to replace Ms Isabella LÖVIN.

(**) Ms Isabella LÖVIN's mandate ended on 3 October 2014.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT BY MEMBER STATE

(1 July 2014)

United Kingdom (73 Members)

AGNEW John Stuart

AKER Tim

ANDERSON Lucy

ANDERSON Martina

ARNOTT Jonathan

ASHWORTH Richard

ATKINSON Janice

BASHIR Amjad

BATTEN Gerard

BEARDER Catherine

BOURS Louise

BRADBOURN Philip*

BRANNEN Paul

CAMPBELL BANNERMAN David

CARVER Jim

COBURN David

COLLINS Jane

CORBETT Richard

DANCE Seb

(The Earl of) DARTMOUTH William

DEVA Nirj

DODDS Anneliese

DODDS Diane

DUNCAN Ian

ETHERIDGE Bill

EVANS Jill

FARAGE Nigel

FINCH Raymond

FORD Vicky

FOSTER Jacqueline

FOX Ashley

GILL Nathan

GILL Neena

GIRLING Julie

GRIFFIN Theresa

HANNAN Daniel

HELMER Roger

HONEYBALL Mary

HOOKEM Mike

HOWITT Richard

HUDGHTON Ian

JAMES Diane

KAMALL Syed

KARIM Sajjad

KHAN Afzal

KIRKHOPE Timothy

KIRTON-DARLING Jude

LAMBERT Jean

LEWER Andrew

McAVAN Linda

McCLARKIN Emma

McINTYRE Anthea

MARTIN David

MOODY Clare

MORAES Claude

NICHOLSON James

NUTTALL Paul

O'FLYNN Patrick

PARKER Margot

REID Julia

SCOTT CATO Molly

SEYMOUR Jill

SIMON Sion

SMITH Alyn

STIHLER Catherine

SWINBURNE Kay

TANNOCK Charles

TAYLOR Keith

VAN ORDEN Geoffrey

VAUGHAN Derek

WARD Julie

WILLMOTT Glenis

WOOLFE Steven

(*) Mr Philip BRADBOURN's mandate ended on 20 December 2014.

(1) OJ L 278, 8.10.1976, p. 5.
(2) OJ L 262, 7.10.2005, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 329, 30.12.1993, p. 34.
(4) Judgment in Le Pen vs Parliament, C-208/03, EU:C:2005:429; and judgment in Italy and Donnici vs Parliament, C-393/07 and C-9/08, EU:C:2009:275.


Cross-border exchange of information on road safety related traffic offences ***I
PDF 208kWORD 51k
Resolution
Text
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on facilitating cross-border exchange of information on road safety related traffic offences (COM(2014)0476 – C8-0113/2014 – 2014/0218(COD))
P8_TA(2015)0029A8-0001/2015

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2014)0476),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 91(1)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8‑0113/2014),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 15 October 2014(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A8-0001/2015),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 11 February 2015 with a view to the adoption of Directive (EU) 2015/... of the European Parliament and of the Council facilitating cross-border exchange of information on road-safety-related traffic offences

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Directive (EU) 2015/413.)

(1) OJ C 12, 15.1.2015, p. 115.


Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal ***
PDF 211kWORD 48k
European Parliament legislative resolution of 11 February 2015 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union, of a Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal and the Implementation Protocol thereto (12812/2014 – C8-0276/2014 – 2014/0238(NLE))
P8_TA(2015)0030A8-0010/2015

(Consent)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the draft Council decision (12812/2014),

–  having regard to the draft Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Senegal (12830/2014),

–  having regard to the request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Article 43, Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 218(7), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8‑0276/2014),

–  having regard to Rule 99(1), first and third subparagraphs, Rule 99(2), and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Fisheries and the opinions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Budgets (A8-0010/2015),

1.  Gives its consent to conclusion of the Agreement;

2.  Calls on the Commission to forward to Parliament the minutes and the conclusions of the meetings of the Joint Committee provided for in Article 7 of the Agreement, as well as the multiannual sectoral programme provided for in Article 4 of the new protocol;

3.  Calls on the Commission to facilitate the participation of representatives of Parliament as observers in the meetings of the Joint Committee;

4.  Calls on the Commission to send to Parliament and to the Council, before the present Agreement expires and as negotiations begin for a future one, detailed information in the form of an ex post report on the costs and benefits of the Agreement;

5.  Calls on the Commission to submit to Parliament yearly reports on the implementation of the Agreement, concerning in particular the multiannual programme mentioned in Article 4 of the Implementation Protocol to the Agreement, as well as detailing the way funds provided pursuant to the Agreement are used;

6.  Calls on the Commission and Council, acting within the limits of their respective powers, to keep Parliament immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedures related to the protocol and its renewal, pursuant to Article 13(2) of the Treaty on European Union and Article 218(10) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

7.   Calls on the Commission to focus in particular on the promotion of local management and accountability, as well as to facilitate the provision of adequate information to all local actors interested in the Agreement and its implementation;

8.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of Senegal.


US Senate report on the use of torture by the CIA
PDF 139kWORD 56k
European Parliament resolution of 11 February 2015 on the US Senate report on the use of torture by the CIA (2014/2997(RSP))
P8_TA(2015)0031B8-0098/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular Articles 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 21 thereof,

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 18 and 19 thereof,

–  having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights and the protocols thereto,

–  having regard to the relevant UN human rights instruments, in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of 10 December 1984 and the relevant protocols thereto, and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance of 20 December 2006,

–  having regard to the European Court of Human Rights judgments in cases al-Nashiri v. Poland, Abu Zubaydah v. Lithuania, Husayn (Abu Zubaydah) v. Poland, El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Nasr and Ghali v. Italy, and al-Nashiri v. Romania,

–  having regard to the Italian Court judgment that convicted and sentenced to prison terms in absentia 22 CIA agents, one Air Force pilot and two Italian agents over their role in the 2003 kidnapping of the Imam of Milan, Abu Omar,

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2006 on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners, adopted midway through the work of the Temporary Committee(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 February 2007 on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 11 September 2012 on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA: follow-up of the European Parliament TDIP Committee report(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 10 October 2013 on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA(4),

–  having regard to the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) study on the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA’s) Detention and Interrogation Programme and its use of various forms of torture on detainees between 2001 and 2006,

–  having regard to its resolutions on Guantánamo, the most recent being that of 23 May 2013 on Guantánamo: hunger strike by prisoners(5),

–  having regard to the Council conclusions on fundamental rights and the rule of law and on the Commission’s 2013 report on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Luxembourg, 5 and 6 June 2014),

–  having regard to its resolution of 27 February 2014 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (2012)(6),

–  having regard to the Commission communication ‘A new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law’ of 11 March 2014 (COM(2014)0158),

–  having regard to the Commission’s EU anti-corruption report of 3 February 2014 (COM(2014)0038),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2014 on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs(7),

–  having regard to Directive 2012/29/EU of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA,

–  having regard to Rule 123(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law is an essential element in successful counterterrorism policies;

B.  whereas Parliament has repeatedly condemned the CIA’s secret detention and extraordinary rendition programme, which resulted in multiple human rights violations including the use of torture and other inhumane or degrading treatment, abduction, secret detention, detention without trial, and violations of the non-refoulement principle;

C.  whereas, despite their particular nature, policies of national security and counterterrorism are not exempt from the principle of accountability, and there can be no impunity for violations of international law and human rights;

D.  whereas accountability for extraordinary renditions, abductions, illegal secret detentions and torture is essential in order to protect and promote human rights effectively in the internal and external policies of the EU, and to ensure legitimate and effective security policies based on the rule of law;

E.  whereas Parliament has repeatedly called for full investigations into the collaboration of EU Member States with the CIA’s secret detention and extraordinary rendition programme;

F.  whereas the former Parliament, in its abovementioned resolution of 10 October 2013, called on the current Parliament to continue to fulfil and implement the mandate given by the Temporary Committee on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners, and consequently to ensure that its recommendations were followed up, to examine new elements that might emerge and to make full use of, and develop, its rights of inquiry;

G.  whereas the report by the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence reveals new facts that reinforce allegations that a number of EU Member States, their authorities and officials and agents of their security and intelligence services were complicit in the CIA’s secret detention and extraordinary rendition programme, sometimes through corrupt means based on substantial amounts of money provided by the CIA in exchange for their cooperation;

H.  whereas the report by the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence rebuts CIA claims that torture revealed information that could not have been collected through traditional, non-violent interrogation techniques;

I.  whereas an open criminal case (No 150/09, before Central Court No 5 (Juzgado Central No 5)) concerning the torture taking place at the Guantánamo Bay Naval Base is ongoing within the National Court (Audiencia Nacional) of the Kingdom of Spain;

J.  whereas US President Barack Obama committed to closing the Guantánamo Bay detention facility by January 2010, a facility which holds 122 detainees without formal criminal charges having being brought against them before a criminal court, including 54 who have been officially cleared for release;

K.  whereas the assistance of EU Member States in resettling some of the Guantánamo Bay prisoners has been slow and limited;

1.  Welcomes the decision of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to publish the summary of its report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s Detention and Interrogation Programme; encourages the publication of the report in full, without excessive and unnecessary redactions;

2.  Expresses its deep condemnation of the gruesome interrogation practices that characterised these illegal counterterrorism operations; underlines the fundamental conclusion by the US Senate that the violent methods applied by the CIA failed to generate intelligence that prevented further terrorist attacks; recalls its absolute condemnation of torture;

3.  Considers that the climate of impunity regarding the CIA programme has enabled the continuation of fundamental rights violations, as further revealed by the mass surveillance programmes of the US National Security Agency and secret services of various EU Member States;

4.  Calls on the US to investigate and prosecute the multiple human rights violations resulting from the CIA rendition and secret detention programmes, and to cooperate with all requests from EU Member States for information, extradition or effective remedies for victims in connection with the CIA programme;

5.  Reiterates its calls on Member States to investigate the allegations that there were secret prisons on their territory where people were held under the CIA programme, and to prosecute those involved in these operations, taking into account all the new evidence that has come to light;

6.  Calls on Member States to investigate fully recent allegations that illegal rendition, detention and torture took place on their territory and to prosecute those responsible;

7.  Expresses concerns regarding the obstacles encountered by national parliamentary and judicial investigations into some Member States’ involvement in the CIA programme, the abuse of state secrecy, and the undue classification of documents resulting in the termination of criminal proceedings and leading to de facto impunity of perpetrators of human rights violations;

8.  Calls for the findings of existing inquiries relating to Member States’ involvement in the CIA programme, in particular the Chilcot inquiry, to be published without further delay;

9.  Calls for the adoption of an EU internal strategy on fundamental rights and invites the Commission to propose the adoption of such a strategy and a related plan of action;

10.  Instructs its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, with the association of its Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in particular its subcommittee on Human Rights, to resume its inquiry on ‘alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA’ and to report to plenary within a year by:

   following up on the recommendations made in its abovementioned resolution of 11 September 2012 on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA: follow-up of the European Parliament TDIP Committee report;
   facilitating and supporting human-rights-compliant mutual legal assistance and judicial cooperation between investigating authorities and cooperation between lawyers involved in accountability work in Member States;
   organising a hearing involving national parliaments and practitioners to take stock of all past and ongoing parliamentary and judicial inquiries;
   organising a Parliamentary fact-finding mission involving all interested political groups to the EU Member States where CIA secret detention sites allegedly existed;
   gathering all relevant information and evidence on possible bribes or other acts of corruption linked to the CIA programme;

11.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 303 E, 13.12.2006, p. 833.
(2) OJ C 287 E, 29.11.2007, p. 309.
(3) OJ C 353 E, 3.12.2013, p. 1.
(4) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0418.
(5) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0231.
(6) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0173.
(7) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0230.


Anti-terrorism measures
PDF 152kWORD 71k
European Parliament resolution of 11 February 2015 on anti-terrorism measures (2015/2530(RSP))
P8_TA(2015)0032RC-B8-0122/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Articles 2, 3, 6, 7 and 21 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and to Articles 4, 16, 20, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72, 75, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87 and 88 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Articles 6, 7, 8, 10(1), 11, 12, 21, 47-50, 52 and 53 thereof,

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 20 June 2014 on the final implementation report of the EU Internal Security Strategy 2010-2014 (COM(2014)0365),

–  having regard to Europol’s EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT) for 2014,

–  having regard to the resolution adopted by the UN Security Council on 24 September 2014 on threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts (Resolution 2178 (2014)),

–  having regard to the EU Internal Security Strategy, as adopted by the Council on 25 February 2010,

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 December 2011 on the EU Counter-Terrorism Policy: main achievements and future challenges(1),

–  having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 24 April 2009 on the problem of profiling, notably on the basis of ethnicity and race, in counter-terrorism, law enforcement, immigration, customs and border control(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2013 on the second report on the implementation of the EU Internal Security Strategy(3),

–  having regard to Europol’s Threat Assessment on Internet Facilitated Organised Crime (iOCTA) 2014,

–  having regard to Europol’s EU Serious and Organised Crime Threat Assessment (SOCTA) 2013,

–  having regard to its plenary debate of 28 January 2015 on anti-terrorism measures,

–  having regard to the informal Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council held in Riga on 29 and 30 January 2015,

–  having regard to its resolution of 17 December 2014 on the EU’s renewed internal security strategy(4),

–  having regard to the statement of the informal JHA Council of 11 January 2015,

–  having regard to the JHA Council conclusions of 9 October 2014 and 5 December 2014,

–  having regard to the report of the EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator to the European Council of 24 November 2014 (15799/14),

–  having regard to the Commission’s Work Programme 2015 published on 16 December 2014 (COM(2014)0910),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 15 January 2014 entitled ‘Preventing Radicalisation to Terrorism and Violent Extremism: Strengthening the EU’s Response’ (COM(2013)0941),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party on the application of necessity and proportionality concepts and data protection within the law enforcement sector (Opinion 01/2014),

–  having regard to the judgment of the Court of Justice of 8 April 2014 in joined cases C-293/12 and C-594/12, Digital Rights Ireland ltd and Seitlinger and others, and the opinion of Parliament’s Legal Service on the interpretation of this judgment,

–  having regard to Rule 123(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas terrorism and violent extremism are among the major threats to our security and our freedoms;

B.  whereas the recent tragic events in Paris stood as a reminder that the European Union is facing a continuous and evolving terrorist threat which over the past decade has severely hit several of its Member States with attacks targeting not only people but also the values and freedoms on which the Union is based;

C.  whereas security is one of the rights guaranteed by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, but fundamental rights, civil liberties and proportionality are essential elements in successful counter-terrorism policies;

D.  whereas prevention strategies to combat terrorism should rely on a multifaceted approach aimed at directly countering the preparation of attacks on EU territory, but also at integrating the need to address the root causes of terrorism; whereas terrorism is a global threat that needs to be tackled on the local, national, European and global levels in order to strengthen our citizens’ security, to defend the fundamental values of freedom, democracy and human rights and to uphold international law;

E.  whereas the several severe terrorist attacks on European soil since 11 September 2001, most recently in January this year, have had a significant impact on the sense of security among EU citizens and residents; whereas the security situation in Europe has changed dramatically in recent years owing to new conflicts and upheavals in the EU’s immediate neighbourhood, the rapid development of new technologies, and the worrying rise of radicalisation that is leading to violence and terrorism both within the EU and in neighbouring countries;

F.  whereas the spread of terrorist propaganda is facilitated by the use of the internet and social media; whereas cyberterrorism enables terrorist groups to establish and maintain links without the physical obstacle of borders, thus reducing the need to have bases or sanctuaries in countries;

G.  whereas the EU is facing the severe and growing threat posed by the so-called ‘EU foreign fighters’, namely individuals who travel to a state other than their state of residence or nationality for the purpose of perpetrating or planning terrorist acts, or providing or receiving terrorist training, including in connection with armed conflicts; whereas an estimated 3 500 to 5 000 EU nationals have left their homes to become foreign fighters with the outbreak of the war and violence in Syria, Iraq and Libya, posing an immense challenge to the security of EU citizens;

1.  Condemns in the strongest terms the atrocities in Paris, and reiterates its deepest sympathy with the people of France and the families of the victims, and its unity in the global fight against terrorism and the attack upon our democratic values and freedoms;

2.  Strongly and categorically condemns all terrorist acts, the promotion of terrorism, the glorification of those involved in terrorism and the advocacy of extremist violent ideologies, wherever they take place or are advocated in the world; stresses that there is no freedom without security and no security without freedom;

3.  Notes with concern the rapidly rising number of EU nationals who travel to conflict areas to join terrorist organisations and later return to EU territory, presenting risks to the Union’s internal security and the lives of EU citizens; asks the Commission to propose a clear and common definition of ‘EU foreign fighters’ in order to increase legal certainty;

4.  Underlines the need for more specialised measures to tackle the problem of EU citizens travelling to fight for terrorist organisations abroad; affirms that while prosecution can be pursued in some cases, other measures should be applied to prevent radicalisation leading to violent extremism, to disrupt the travel of European and other foreign fighters and to deal with returnees; calls on the Member States and the Commission to develop best practices based on those of Member States that have adopted successful strategies, action plans and programmes in this field;

Combating the root causes of terrorism and radicalisation leading to violent extremism

5.  Stresses that addressing the threat posed by terrorism in general requires an anti-terrorism strategy based on a multi-layer approach, which comprehensively addresses the underlying factors of radicalisation leading to violent extremism, such as developing social cohesion, inclusiveness and political and religious tolerance, and avoiding ghettoization, analysing and counterbalancing online incitement to perform terrorist acts, preventing departures to join terrorist organisations, preventing and stemming recruitment and engagement in armed conflicts, disrupting financial support to terrorist organisations and individuals aiming to join them, ensuring firm legal prosecution where appropriate and providing law enforcement authorities with the appropriate tools to perform their duties with full respect for fundamental rights;

6.  Calls on the Member States to invest in schemes which address the root causes of radicalisation, including educational programmes, promoting integration, social inclusion, dialogue, participation, equality, tolerance and understanding among different cultures and religions, and rehabilitation programmes;

7.  Points with grave concern to the phenomenon of radicalisation in prisons, and encourages the Member States to exchange best practices on the matter; asks that special attention be given to prisons and detention conditions, with targeted measures to address radicalisation in this environment; calls on the Member States to do more to improve prisons’ administrative systems so as to facilitate detection of detainees who are involved in the preparation of terrorist acts, monitor and prevent radicalisation processes and set up specific programmes of disengagement, rehabilitation and deradicalisation;

8.  Stresses the urgent need to intensify the prevention of radicalisation and foster deradicalisation programmes by empowering and engaging with communities and civil society at national and local level to stop the spread of extremist ideologies; calls on the Commission to strengthen the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN), which brings together all the actors involved in developing anti-radicalisation campaigns and setting up deradicalisation structures and processes for returning foreign fighters, and to directly challenge the extremist ideologies by providing positive alternatives;

9.  Supports the adoption of a European strategy for countering terrorist propaganda, radical networks and online recruitment, building upon the efforts already made and the initiatives already taken on an intergovernmental and voluntary basis with a view to further exchanges of best practice and successful methods in this area;

10.  Calls for the adoption of a Council recommendation on national strategies for the prevention of radicalisation, which would address the wide range of underlying factors behind radicalisation and make recommendations to the Member States on the setting-up of disengagement, rehabilitation and deradicalisation programmes;

Implementation and review of existing law enforcement measures

11.  Calls on the Member States to make optimal use of existing platforms, databases and alert systems at European level, such as the Schengen Information System (SIS) and the Advanced Passenger Information Systems (APIS);

12.  Stresses that free movement within the Schengen area is one of the most important freedoms of the European Union, and therefore rules out any proposals to suspend the Schengen system, and encourages Member States instead to tighten up existing rules that already include the possibility of temporarily introducing document checks, and to make better use of the SIS II system; notes that certain targeted checks can already be performed on individuals as they cross external borders;

13.  Commits itself to work towards the finalisation of an EU PNR Directive by the end of the year; therefore urges the Commission to set out the consequences of the ECJ judgment on the Data Retention Directive(5) and its possible impact on the EU PNR Directive; encourages the Council to make progress on the Data Protection package so that trilogues on both – EU PNR Directive and Data Protection Package – could take place in parallel; encourages the Commission to invite independent experts from the law enforcement, security and intelligence communities and representatives of Working Party 29 to contribute views and principles, in light of security needs, regarding the necessity and proportionality of the PNR;

14.  Calls on the Commission to immediately and thereafter regularly evaluate the current instruments and undertake a corresponding assessment of the remaining gaps in the fight against terrorism, where the European Council shall regularly assess the threats facing the Union in order to enable the Union and its Member States to take effective action; calls on the Commission and the Council to endorse a renewed roadmap to combat terrorism, which delivers an efficient response to existing threats and ensures effective security for all while guaranteeing the rights and freedoms which are the founding principles of the European Union;

15.  Stresses that an essential dimension of the fight against terrorism must be the inclusion of policies to protect and support the victims and their families; calls, therefore, on all Member States to properly implement Directive 2012/29/EU of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime;

16.  Considers that combating trafficking in firearms should be a priority for the EU in fighting serious and organised international crime; believes that, in particular, cooperation needs to be strengthened further as regards information exchange mechanisms and the traceability and destruction of prohibited weapons; calls on the Commission to evaluate as a matter of urgency the existing EU rules on the movement of illegal firearms, explosive devices and arms trafficking linked to organised crime;

17.  Welcomes the upcoming adoption at European level of an updated legal framework for combating money laundering, as a decisive step to be implemented at all levels in order to ensure its effectiveness and thus address a significant source of financing for terrorist organisations;

18.  Calls on Member States to step up judicial cooperation between them based on the available EU instruments, such as ECRIS, the European Arrest Warrant and the European Investigation Order;

EU internal security and EU law enforcement and Agency capabilities

19.  Calls on all Member States to prevent the movement of terrorist suspects by strengthening external border controls, checking travel documents more systematically and effectively, tackling illicit arms trafficking and fraudulent use of identity, and identifying risk areas;

20.  Notes with concern the increasing use of internet and communications technology by terrorist organisations in order to communicate, plan attacks, and spread propaganda; asks that internet and social media companies work with governments and law enforcement authorities and civil society in order to combat this problem, whilst ensuring that the general principles of free speech and privacy are respected at all times; underlines that measures limiting the use and spread of data on the internet for counter-terrorism purposes need to be necessary and proportionate;

21.  Reiterates that all data collection and sharing, including by EU agencies such as Europol, should be compliant with EU and national law and based on a coherent data protection framework offering legally binding personal data protection standards at an EU level;

22.  Strongly encourages better exchange of information between Member States’ law enforcement authorities and EU agencies; further stresses the need to improve, intensify and accelerate global law enforcement information sharing; calls for more effective operational cooperation among Member States and third countries through the use of such valuable existing instruments as Joint Investigation Teams, the Terrorist Financial Tracking Programme and passenger name record (PNR) agreements, as well as more expeditious and efficient sharing of relevant data and information, subject to the appropriate data protection and privacy safeguards;

23.  Calls on the Commission and the Council to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the EU’s counter-terrorism and related measures, in particular as regards the implementation thereof in law and in practice in the Member States and the degree to which the Member States cooperate with the EU’s agencies in the area, notably Europol and Eurojust, and to undertake a corresponding assessment of the remaining gaps, making use of the procedure provided for in Article 70 TFEU, and to introduce this evaluation process as part of the European Agenda on Security;

24.  Underlines the need for European agencies and national law enforcement authorities to combat the main sources of revenue for terrorist organisations, including money laundering, human trafficking, and the illicit arms trade; calls, in this respect, for the full implementation of EU legislation in this area, in order to have an EU-wide coordinated approach; notes that only 50 % of information regarding terrorism and organised crime is given by Member States to Europol and Eurojust;

25.  Invites the Member States to make better use of Europol’s unique capabilities by ensuring that their national units provide Europol with the relevant information in a more systematic and routine manner; further supports the creation of a European counter-terrorism platform within Europol to maximise its operational, technical and intelligence exchange capabilities;

26.  Stresses the need to step up the effectiveness and the coordination of the criminal justice response through Eurojust, to harmonise criminalisation of foreign-fighter-related offences across the EU to provide a legal framework and to facilitate cross-border cooperation, to avoid prosecution gaps and to address the practical and legal challenges in the gathering and admissibility of evidence in terrorism cases, by updating Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA;

27.  Calls for strong democratic and judicial oversight of counter-terrorism policies and intelligence work within the EU, with full independent democratic scrutiny, and insists that security cooperation should be strictly in line with international law;

Adopting an EU external strategy to combat international terrorism

28.  Calls for the EU to actively promote a global partnership against terrorism and to work closely with regional actors such as the African Union, the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab League, and in particular with the countries which are neighbours of Syria and Iraq and countries who have been dramatically impacted by the conflict, such as Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey, as well as with the UN and notably its Counter-Terrorism Committee; calls, in this regard, for increased dialogue between development and security experts between the EU and those countries;

29.  Emphasises, in particular, the need for the EU, its Member States and its partner countries to base their strategy for combating international terrorism on the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights; stresses, furthermore, that the Union’s external actions to combat international terrorism should in the first place be aimed at preventing, countering and prosecuting terrorism;

30.  Calls on the European External Action Service (EEAS) to adopt an EU external strategy for combating international terrorism, in order to address the sources of international terrorism and mainstream counter-terrorism; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to develop a counter-terrorism cooperation strategy with third countries while ensuring that international human rights standards are respected;

31.  Urges the EU to revise its strategy towards the southern Mediterranean as part of the ongoing European Neighbourhood Policy review, and to focus on supporting those countries and actors who are genuinely committed to shared values and to reform;

32.  Stresses the need to focus on preventing and countering radicalisation in the action plans and political dialogues between the EU and its partner countries, including by increasing international cooperation, making use of existing programmes and capacities, and working with civil society actors in countries of interest on countering terrorist and radical propaganda on the internet and on other means of communication;

33.  Stresses that a comprehensive EU strategy on anti-terrorism measures must also make full use of its foreign and development policies in order to combat poverty, discrimination and marginalisation, to fight corruption and promote good governance and to prevent and resolve conflicts, all of which contribute to the marginalisation of certain groups and sectors of society and thus make them more vulnerable to extremist group propaganda;

o
o   o

34.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 168 E, 14.6.2013, p. 45.
(2) OJ C 184 E, 8.7.2010, p. 119.
(3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0384.
(4) Texts adopted, P8_TA(2014)0102.
(5) Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC (OJ L 105, 13.4.2006, p. 54).


Renewal of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum
PDF 136kWORD 56k
European Parliament resolution of 11 February 2015 on the renewal of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum (2015/2526(RSP))
P8_TA(2015)0033RC-B8-0099/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to its resolution of 23 June 2005 on the information society(1),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2006 on a European information society for growth and employment(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2008 on the second Internet Governance Forum(3),

–  having regard to the Declaration of Principles and the Plan of Action of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), adopted in Geneva on 12 December 2003,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Towards a Global Partnership in the Information Society: Translating the Geneva Principles into Actions’ (COM(2004)0480),

–  having regard to the Tunis Commitment and Agenda for the Information Society, adopted on 18 November 2005,

–  having regard to the Commission communication following the WSIS in 2006 (COM(2006)0181),

–  having regard to its resolution of 15 June 2010 on Internet governance: the next steps(4),

–  having regard to the NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement presented on 24 April 2014,

–  having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Internet Policy and Governance – Europe’s role in shaping the future of Internet Governance’ (COM(2014)0072),

–  having regard to the joint statement by the EU delegation to the Internet Governance Forum held from 2 to 5 September 2014 in Istanbul,

–  having regard to Rule 123(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas the purpose of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is to carry out its mandate from the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) with regard to convening forums for democratic, transparent and multistakeholder policy dialogue;

B.  whereas the main role and function of the IGF is to discuss a wide range of issues related to internet governance and, where appropriate, to make recommendations to the international community;

C.  whereas on 20 December 2010 the UN General Assembly decided to extend the mandate of the IGF for a further five years;

D.  whereas the discussion and decision on renewing the mandate of the IGF further will take place in 2015 at the UN General Assembly;

E.  whereas Parliament sent an ad hoc delegation to the WSIS in 2005 and has done so for every annual meeting of the IGF since then;

F.  whereas the ad hoc delegations Parliament has sent have played a pivotal role regarding the promotion of European values and the interaction with civil society organisations and representatives of national parliaments present at these events, in cooperation with the Member States and the Commission;

G.  whereas the top priorities for the European Union during the ninth IGF held in September 2014, with the overarching theme ‘Connecting Continents for Enhanced Multistakeholder Internet Governance’, were: expanded internet access globally; maintenance of the internet as a global, open and common resource; non-discriminatory access to knowledge; greater accountability and transparency in the multistakeholder internet governance model; rejection of the idea of a state-controlled internet; and recognition that our fundamental freedoms and human rights are not negotiable and must be protected online;

H.  whereas on 27 November 2014 the EU transport, telecommunications and energy ministers approved the Council conclusions underlining the importance of a coordinated European position on internet governance and of support for strengthening the IGF as a multistakeholder platform;

I.  whereas in March 2014 the US Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced its intention to transfer the internet supervision functions of the IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority) to the global multistakeholder community before the expiry of the current contract between the NTIA and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in September 2015; whereas a balanced solution for this transition has to be found in time and should result in a system that cannot be subject to capture and manipulation, thereby continuing to ensure a stable internet;

J.  whereas in April 2014 the NETmundial-Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the future of Internet Governance drew up a set of principles for internet governance and a roadmap for future development of the internet ecosystem;

K.  whereas growth related to the internet economy is forecast to be almost 11 % in the EU, with a contribution to GDP expected to rise from 3,8 % in 2010 to 5,7 % in 2016,

L.  whereas the internet constitutes a fundamental pillar of the Digital Single Market, and fosters, inter alia, innovation, growth, trade, democracy, cultural diversity and human rights;

M.  whereas in an open internet all the rights and freedoms that people have offline should also apply online;

1.  Calls on the UN General Assembly to renew the mandate of the IGF, and to strengthen its resources and the multistakeholder model of internet governance;

2.  Considers that, although the IGF will not adopt formal conclusions, the European Union’s responsibility is to support this process and to raise the impact of these exchanges in policy discussions, as it offers a positive and concrete context for the shaping of the internet’s future on the basis of a multistakeholder approach;

3.  Calls on the Member States and the EU institutions concerned to keep the IGF high on their agendas and to continue to support the IGF and its secretariat, and to contribute to the development of an efficient and independent organisation capable of exercising its mandate and contributing to the evolving model of internet governance;

4.  Stresses that Parliament should continue to participate in future IGF meetings with a substantial delegation in order to contribute effectively to formulating an EU approach on internet governance together with the Member States and the Commission;

5.  Stresses the need to improve internet access all over the world; underlines that the IGF should increase the inclusive participation of all stakeholders;

6.  Stresses that it is firmly committed to the multistakeholder model of internet governance; calls upon the Member States, the Commission and all relevant stakeholders to further strengthen the sustainability of this model by making actors and processes at national, regional and international levels more inclusive, transparent and accountable;

7.  Emphasises the importance of completing the globalisation of the internet’s core functions and organisations; welcomes the commitment made by the US Government in March 2014 for the transfer of stewardship over the IANA functions; emphasises the importance of the full accountability and transparency of ICANN;

8.  Underlines the existence of a firm deadline for completion of the negotiations on IANA functions that will provide a long-term solution for the stability and security of the internet, as in September 2015 the current agreement between ICANN and the US Government on the supervision of the IANA function will expire;

9.  Calls on the Member States and the Commission to increase their efforts to support the conclusion of this new timely agreement;

10.  Calls on the EU institutions concerned to propose the EU itself as a first international partner with ICANN as regards IANA functions, including a role on equal grounds with the US and other states in the affirmation of commitments that are currently regulating IANA services; considers this an important step in ensuring the complete neutrality of ICANN;

11.  Stresses that lessons can already be learnt from the fruitful exchanges held in the context of the IGF up to now, and can be acted upon, in particular as regards regulatory aspects of electronic communications, and data security and privacy issues; considers that further discussions are needed within the IGF on issues related to cybersecurity and cybercrimes, ranging from solutions to improve the security of critical infrastructures to giving the appropriate tools for secure communication to individuals and small businesses, notably e-authentication and encryption; underlines the need to secure an open and independent internet as a global, common resource, together with non-discriminatory access to knowledge in the future, based on the initiatives and needs of the stakeholders, as well as freedom of expression;

12.  Stresses that it is crucial to continue efforts to ensure legal protection of net neutrality, which is an indispensable precondition for safeguarding freedom of information and expression, boosting growth and jobs by developing innovation and business opportunities related to the internet and promoting and safeguarding cultural and linguistic diversity;

13.  Stresses that fundamental freedoms and human rights are not negotiable and must be protected both online and offline; regrets that some states attempt to curb the global connectivity of their citizens by censorship and other restrictions; strongly rejects the idea of a state-controlled internet and mass surveillance of the internet;

14.  Stresses the economic and social importance of online rights for privacy and of users’ control of their personal data; considers such rights to be fundamental for democracy, an open and neutral internet and a level playing field for businesses on the web;

15.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the Member States and the national parliaments.

(1) OJ C 133 E, 8.6.2006, p. 140.
(2) OJ C 291 E, 30.11.2006, p. 133.
(3) OJ C 41 E, 19.2.2009, p. 80.
(4) OJ C 236 E, 12.8.2011, p. 33.


Country of origin labelling for meat in processed foods
PDF 140kWORD 58k
European Parliament resolution of 11 February 2015 on country of origin labelling for meat in processed food (2014/2875(RSP))
P8_TA(2015)0034B8-0097/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004(1) (the ‘Food Information to Consumers Regulation’), and in particular Article 26(6) and (7) thereof,

–  having regard to the Commission report of 17 December 2013 regarding the mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for meat used as an ingredient (COM(2013)0755), and the accompanying Commission staff working document of 17 December 2013 entitled ‘Origin labelling for meat used as an ingredient: consumers’ attitude, feasibility of possible scenarios and impacts’ (SWD(2013)0437),

–  having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1337/2013 of 13 December 2013 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for fresh, chilled and frozen meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry(2),

–  having regard to its resolution of 6 February 2014 on the abovementioned Commission implementing regulation of 13 December 2013(3),

–  having regard to its resolution of 14 January 2014 on the food crisis, fraud in the food chain and the control thereof(4),

–  having regard to the question to the Commission on country-of-origin labelling for meat in processed food (O-000091/2014 – B8‑0101/2015),

–  having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety,

–  having regard to Rules 128(5) and 123(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.  whereas Article 26(6) of the Food Information to Consumers Regulation requires the Commission to submit a report to Parliament and the Council by 13 December 2013 concerning the mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance of meat used as an ingredient;

B.  whereas Article 26(7) of the abovementioned regulation provides that the report must, inter alia, take into account the need for the consumer to be informed, the feasibility of providing the mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance and an analysis of the costs and benefits of the introduction of such measures; whereas it provides further that the report may be accompanied by proposals to modify relevant provisions of EU legislation;

C.  whereas on 17 December 2013 the Commission duly published its report regarding the mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for meat used as an ingredient, and an accompanying staff working document entitled ‘Origin labelling for meat used as an ingredient: consumers’ attitude, feasibility of possible scenarios and impacts’;

D.  whereas it is estimated that 30 % to 50 %, depending on the Member State concerned, of the total slaughtered meat volume is processed into meat ingredients for foodstuffs, mostly into minced meat, meat preparations and meat products;

E.  whereas the Commission has yet to make any follow-up legislative proposals and concludes that further appropriate steps will be taken following discussions in Parliament and the Council;

F.  whereas, according to the abovementioned Commission report regarding the mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for meat used as an ingredient, the existing traceability systems in the EU are not adequate to pass on origin information along the food chain;

G.  whereas Article 26(2) of the Food Information to Consumers Regulation provides that indication of the country of origin or place of provenance is mandatory where failure to indicate this might mislead the consumer as to the true country of origin or place of provenance of the food, in particular if the information accompanying the food or the label as a whole would otherwise imply that the food has a different country of origin or place of provenance;

H.  whereas the impact assessment that supported the Food Information to Consumers Regulation indicated that the origin of meat appears to be consumers’ prime concern across the EU(5);

I.  whereas according to the Food Chain Evaluation Consortium’s consumer survey of 2013, meat-based food scored highest among the various food groups covered by the survey when it comes to interest in origin labelling; whereas, on the basis of a more targeted examination of different types of processed meat-based product, the survey results indicate that more than 90 % of consumer respondents consider it important that origin be labelled;

1.  Notes that indication of origin has been mandatory for unprocessed beef and beef products in the EU as a consequence of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) crisis(6), and that EU rules for beef labelling have been in place since 1 January 2002; notes that these labelling requirements already include place of birth, rearing and slaughter;

2.  Considers that the abovementioned requirements applicable to unprocessed beef and beef products have raised consumer expectations as regards information on the origin of other types of fresh meat widely consumed in the EU and of meat used as an ingredient in processed foods;

3.  Notes that recital 31 of the Food Information to Consumers Regulation underlines the fact that the origin of meat is of prime concern to consumers and that as a result consumers expect to be properly informed about the country of origin of meat; points out, in addition, that recital 31 stipulates that mandatory labelling requirements should take into account the principle of proportionality and the administrative burden for food business operators and enforcement authorities;

4.  Stresses that 90 % of companies in the meat processing sector are SMEs; stresses the special role played by SMEs in the creation of growth and jobs, their contribution to a competitive European economy and their commitment to safe and high-quality food; believes that the creation of a level playing field for players in the sector is essential;

5.  Reiterates its concern over the potential impact of food fraud on food safety, consumer health, consumer confidence, the functioning of the food chain and the stability of agricultural prices, and emphasises the importance of addressing food fraud as a matter of priority and thereby quickly restoring the confidence of European consumers;

6.  Believes that labelling the country or place of origin of meat and meat products does not in itself prevent fraud, but that a rigorous traceability system does contribute to detecting possible infringements and taking action against them; notes that recent food scandals, including the fraudulent substitution of horsemeat for beef, have shown that stricter rules on traceability and consumer information are wanted by consumers; points out that stricter rules on traceability would also enable authorities to investigate food fraud incidents more effectively;

7.  Highlights the importance of considering horsemeat in the context of meat used as an ingredient in processed foods, besides beef and the meat of swine, sheep, goats and poultry, as it represents a considerable share of meat used in processed foods;

8.  Highlights, further, the fact that the Commission’s own report recognises that more than 90 % of consumer respondents consider it important that meat origin be labelled on processed food products(7); notes that this is one of several factors that may influence consumer behaviour;

9.  Believes that labelling the origin of meat used as an ingredient in foods will help ensure better traceability along the food supply chain, more stable relationships between meat suppliers and processors and increased diligence when food business operators choose their suppliers and products;

10.  Feels that food labelling should take account of the transparency of the information and its readability for consumers while enabling European businesses to operate in an economically viable manner and in conditions acceptable to the consumer’s purchasing power;

11.  Points out that, as regards price impacts, the results of research undertaken by a French consumer organisation diverge widely from the findings of the Commission’s report as regards the costs of introducing country-of-origin labelling; recommends that this issue be further examined in order to gain a clearer picture of the possible price effects, provided that such an examination is done in conjunction with consumer organisations and would not delay legislative proposals;

12.  Notes that country-of-origin labelling will become mandatory for unprocessed meat of swine, sheep, goat and poultry as of April 2015; whereas this must be taken into account in assessing the costs of providing origin information for these types of meat when used as an ingredient;

13.  Notes that current voluntary origin information can give misleading information to consumers;

14.  Calls on the Commission to review such voluntary schemes on origin labelling and propose clear, consistent, harmonised and enforceable rules when producers decide to implement voluntary origin labelling;

15.  Notes further that while, as indicated in the Commission report, an EU/non-EU labelling indication requirement would be a lower-cost alternative, research undertaken by the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC), which covers some Member States, has found that this would not be an acceptable solution for consumers(8);

16.  Believes that the Commission should investigate further the practice (which is already fairly widespread) among some European retailers and manufacturers of labelling the origin of meat in processed foods and to report its findings;

17.  Reiterates its call for the Commission to take all necessary steps to make the prevention and combating of food fraud an integral part of EU policy and to address structural weaknesses within the overall food chain, in particular by increasing and strengthening monitoring;

18.  Urges the Commission to adopt an implementing act concerning the application of Article 26(3) of the Food Information to Consumers Regulation, which relates to the indication of the country of origin of primary ingredients where this is not the same as that of the food product;

19.  Urges the Commission to follow up its report with legislative proposals making the indication of the origin of meat in processed foods mandatory in order to ensure greater transparency throughout the food chain and to better inform European consumers, while taking into account its impact assessments and avoiding excessive costs and administrative burdens;

20.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 304, 22.11.2011, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 335, 14.12.2013, p. 19.
(3) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0096.
(4) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0011.
(5) See Commission staff working document of 30 January 2008 accompanying the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the provision of food information to consumers – Impact assessment report on general food labelling issues (SEC(2008)0092).
(6) Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97 (OJ L 204, 11.8.2000, p. 1).
(7) COM(2013)0755, p. 7.
(8) http://www.beuc.org/publications/2013-00043-01-e.pdf


The work of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly
PDF 151kWORD 69k
European Parliament resolution of 11 February 2015 on the work of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2014/2154(INI))
P8_TA(2015)0035A8-0012/2015

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000(1) (the ‘Cotonou Agreement’), as first amended in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005(2) and as amended for the second time in Ouagadougou on 22 June 2010(3),

–  having regard to its position of 13 June 2013 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement amending for the second time the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000, as first amended in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005(4),

–  having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA), as adopted on 3 April 2003(5) and most recently amended in Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) on 27 November 2013(6),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 233/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation for the period 2014-2020(7),

–  having regard to its position of 11 December 2013 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation(8),

–  having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2013 on the preparation of the multiannual financial framework regarding the financing of EU cooperation for African, Caribbean and Pacific States and Overseas Countries and Territories for the 2014-2020 period (11th European Development Fund)(9),

–  having regard to its decisions of 3 April 2014 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget for the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth European Development Funds for the financial year 2012(10), and of 3 April 2014 on the closure of the accounts of the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth European Development Funds for the financial year 2012(11), and to its resolution of 3 April 2014 with observations forming an integral part of its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget for the Eighth, Ninth and Tenth European Development Funds for the financial year 2012(12),

–  having regard to the resolutions adopted by the JPA on 27 November 2013 on: the respect for the rule of law and the role of an impartial and independent judiciary; South-South cooperation and triangular cooperation: opportunities and challenges for the ACP countries; the social and environmental impact of pastoralism in ACP countries, and security in the Great Lakes region,

–  having regard to the resolutions adopted by the JPA on 19 June 2013 on: the threats posed again by military coups to democracy and political stability in the ACP countries, and the role of the international community; Economic Partnership Agreements – next steps; human resources for health in ACP countries; the situation in the Republic of Guinea; and the situation in the Central African Republic,

–  having regard to the resolutions adopted by the JPA on 29 November 2012 on: the political and humanitarian crisis in Somalia: the challenges for the European Union and the ACP group; ICT-based entrepreneurship and its impact on development in the ACP countries; and the importance of access to energy for sustainable economic development and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals,

–  having regard to the resolutions adopted by the JPA on 30 May 2012 on: the political impact of the Libyan conflict on neighbouring ACP and EU States; price volatility, the functioning of global markets for agricultural products and their impact on food security in ACP countries; and the social and environmental impact of mining in ACP countries,

–  having regard to the Communiqué adopted on 19 July 2013 in Abuja (Nigeria) at the JPA West African regional meeting(13),

–  having regard to the Communiqué adopted on 16 February 2013 in Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic) at the JPA Caribbean regional meeting(14),

–  having regard to the Communiqué adopted on 20 July 2012 in Apia (Samoa) at the JPA Pacific regional meeting(15),

–  having regard to the Communiqué adopted on 24 February 2012 in Lusaka (Zambia) at the JPA Southern African regional meeting(16),

–  having regard to the Code of Conduct adopted on 19 June 2013 for Members of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly participating in election observation missions,

–  having regard to the UN Millennium Declaration of 18 September 2000, which sets out the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as objectives established jointly by the international community for the elimination of poverty,

–  having regard to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘Increasing the impact of EU development policy: an Agenda for Change’ (COM(2011)0637),

–  having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Development (A8-0012/2015),

A.  whereas the ACP-EU JPA has a unique status, being the only multilateral interparliamentary assembly set up under an international agreement, the Cotonou Agreement;

B.  whereas the JPA has developed into a genuine parliamentary assembly, offering a forum for the open and frank discussion of issues which are central to development cooperation, and makes a considerable contribution to the partnership on an equal footing between the ACP countries and the EU;

C.  whereas the Cotonou Agreement between the members of the ACP Group of States and the EU is centred on the target of reducing and eventually eradicating poverty; whereas cooperation should also contribute to sustainable economic development, which is a basis for lasting peace and security and the democratic and political stability of the ACP countries;

D.  whereas fact-finding missions were organised in 2013, to Mali to better understand the fragile situation of the country, to Liberia to contribute to the political dialogue as foreseen in Article 8 of the Cotonou Agreement, and to Haiti to verify the reconstruction and the political situation;

E.  whereas, after the adoption by the Assembly of a Code of Conduct for its Members participating in election observation missions, a new dynamic has been created which contributes to added value, as is the case of the joint JPA missions to the presidential elections in Mali and the parliamentary elections and the second round of presidential elections in Madagascar;

F.  whereas the revision of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement in 2010 strengthened the role of the JPA and its regional dimension;

G.  whereas full involvement of the JPA should be ensured in the framework of the political dialogue conducted in accordance with Article 8 of the Cotonou Agreement;

H.  considering that it would be important to stimulate a regular informal dialogue based on substantial analysis with different categories of relevant official and non-official actors, in ACP-UE circles (the Joint Parliamentary Assembly, the ACP-EU Council, the ACP-EU private sector and civil society dialogues) and in other circles that do not have a direct interest in the ACP-EU world;

I.   whereas from 2003 to 2013, almost all the European sessions of the JPA took place in principle in the country holding the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union; whereas the rotating presidencies must respect the commitments made under the Cotonou Partnership Agreement in this regard;

J.  considering that the rapid rise of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and other emerging economies at the global level and in the ACP countries and regions is having a growing impact on the ACP Group and the current state of ACP-EU relations;

K.  whereas under the new rules governing travel adopted by the European Parliament’s Bureau, accredited parliamentary assistants are no longer able to assist Members during plenary sessions of the JPA, which has a considerable impact on parliamentary work;

1.  Welcomes the fact that the JPA, as one of the joint institutions of the Cotonou Agreement, continues to provide a framework for an open, democratic and comprehensive dialogue between Members of the European Parliament and the parliamentarians from ACP countries on implementation of this Agreement, including scrutiny of development cooperation under the EDF and conclusion and implementation of the EPAs; welcomes the capacity of the JPA to be a forum in which difficult and controversial subjects can be discussed frankly and openly; calls, therefore, for the future agreement, replacing the Cotonou Agreement, to include an explicit mention of non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity, as demanded on many occasions by the European Parliament;

2.  Stresses the need to strengthen political dialogue, and in this respect stresses the JPA’s role in promoting and defending the principles set out in Article 9 of the Cotonou Agreement, particularly those relating to the rule of law and good governance;

3.  Stresses the added value of holding the JPA sessions in the EU Member States holding the EU Council Presidency by rotation, and believes that this rotation should be maintained in the future; expresses concern at the unfortunate circumstances that led the Irish Presidency not to host the 25th Session; commends, however, the government of Denmark for agreeing to host the highly successful 23rd Session in Horsens, where cultural and educational links were established between the citizens of Horsens and ACP delegates; deplores the lack of interest shown by some EU Member States having held, or expected to hold in the future, the EU Council Presidency by rotation, in hosting the JPA sessions; calls on any EU Member State holding the EU Council Presidency by rotation to involve itself more deeply in the preparation, organisation and hosting of the JPA session;

4.  Underlines the importance of the JPA meetings, including the meetings of standing committees, but regrets that there was often unequal participation between EU members and ACP members and is concerned at the declining participation of EP members, particularly during the voting sessions; notes that there was more equal participation in missions, such as the regional meetings, and hopes these examples will be followed for JPA meetings in Brussels in the future;

5.  Recalls the commitment expressed by the outgoing Vice-President/High Representative that the EU Council should be represented at ministerial level at the sessions of the Assembly, and calls on the incoming Vice-President/High Representative to respect this commitment;

6.  Recalls the obligation of the ACP-EU Council to provide an annual report to the Assembly on the implementation of the Cotonou Agreement, which should include political, socio-economic and environment impact elements, rather than being a mere account of meetings held;

7.  Recalls that, in accordance with Article 14 of the revised Cotonou Agreement, the joint institutions shall endeavour to ensure coordination, coherence and complementarity as well as an effective and reciprocal flow of information; is of the opinion that, as the President of the European Parliament is invited to the meetings of the European Council, the two Co-Presidents of the JPA should be given the opportunity to participate in the sessions of the Joint ACP-EU Council of Ministers; invites the Vice-President/High Representative to further improve the existing cooperation and ensure that the JPA is invited to participate in the next Joint Council;

8.  Stresses the crucial role of the ACP national parliaments, local authorities and non-state actors in the preparatory phases and monitoring of the Country and Regional Strategy Papers and the implementation of the European Development Fund (EDF); calls on the Commission and the ACP governments to guarantee their involvement by supplying all available information to the parliaments of the ACP countries in good time, and assisting them in exercising democratic scrutiny, in particular by means of capacity building;

9.  Takes note of the work of the Working Groups of the Committee on Development of the European Parliament on scrutiny in assessing and monitoring the programming documents for ACP countries and regions under the 11th European Development Fund, and asks for a reporting procedure to the JPA members on the outcomes of this process;

10.  Congratulates the JPA Bureau for extending its work beyond purely administrative matters and using its meetings also for political discussions, by including on the agenda of its meetings in Brussels and Addis Ababa substantive issues of mutual concern, such as ‘the future of ACP-EU relations after 2020’; invites continuation of this practice in the future;

11.  Calls on the JPA Bureau to develop a more strategic orientation concerning the work programme of the Assembly and the choice of reports by its Standing Committees, making sure that the reports are closely linked to the strategic objectives of the JPA and contribute in particular to the negotiations on the post-2015 development framework and EU-ACP relations after 2020;

12.  Reiterates its deepest concern at the deteriorating political and humanitarian situations in several ACP countries and regions, including the domestic and external repercussions of such situations at various levels, and expresses solidarity with the affected populations; calls on the JPA to continue to monitor the situation in ACP countries in crisis, to pay closer attention to situations of state fragility, and to call on the ACP and EU States to fight in a coordinated fashion against the outbreak of the Ebola virus in Western Africa;

13.  Welcomes the increasingly parliamentary – and hence political – nature of the JPA, together with the ever more active role played by its members and the greater quality of its debates, which are helping it make a vital contribution to the ACP-EU partnership; calls on the JPA to strengthen the dialogue on human rights in line with the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the Cotonou Agreement, and to place this dialogue on its agendas as a recurring item;

14.  Draws attention to the fact that the discussion on the post-2020 ACP-EU relations and the future of the ACP group is under way, and stresses the importance of the role that the JPA should play in this process; underlines, in this regard, the need for a comprehensive and strengthened joint parliamentary oversight, independently of the final outcome; stresses that any future agreement taking the place of the Cotonou Agreement should include an explicit mention of non-discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity, as demanded on many occasions by the European Parliament;

15.  Reiterates its deep concern over the adoption and discussion of legislation further criminalising homosexuality in some ACP countries; calls on the JPA to place this on the agenda for its debates; calls for reinforcement of the principle of non-negotiable human rights clauses and sanctions for failure to respect such clauses, inter alia with regard to discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, sexual orientation or gender identity and against people living with HIV/AIDS;

16.  Considers that the post-Cotonou discussion should be an occasion to thoroughly analyse both the failure and the success of the current agreement in terms of the sustainable socio-economic development of ACP countries; believes also that any future ACP-EU development and economic cooperation, as well as trade and investment arrangements, should ensure that no ACP country be left worse off;

17.  Calls on the JPA bureau to appoint, within the JPA, two standing co-rapporteurs on Policy Coherence for Development (PCD), to work closely with the European Parliament’s PCD standing rapporteur, and to produce a biannual report on the implementation of Article 12 of the revised Cotonou Agreement;

18.  Believes that, coinciding with JPA sessions, meetings should be held with civil society organisations active in the countries concerned, the idea being to foster a broader vision and to capitalise on their fund of experience and activities, emphasising best practice, with a view to forging closer ties with those organisations;

19.  Insists that the EPAs with ACP countries should serve development objectives which reflect both national and regional interests and the needs of the ACP populations in order to reduce poverty, achieve the MDGs and ensure respect for fundamental human rights, including socio-economic rights such as the right to food or the right to access basic public services;

20.  Invites the EU-ACP JPA to develop a common approach in defining the future development framework after 2015; encourages the engagement of the JPA members in negotiations on the new Sustainable Development Goals;

21.  Welcomes the fact that successful regional meetings as provided for in the Cotonou Agreement and the JPA Rules of Procedure were held in 2012 and 2013; acknowledges that these meetings make for a genuine exchange of views on regional issues, including conflict prevention and resolution, regional integration and cooperation, and the negotiations for the WTO-compatible EPAs; commends the organisers of the successful meetings in Nigeria, the Dominican Republic, Samoa and Zambia;

22.  Stresses the importance of the workshops organised during the JPA sessions, which complement the plenary debates; invites the Bureau, which is responsible for monitoring the follow-up to resolutions and decisions of the Assembly, to enhance its role and follow up with the chair and rapporteur of the standing committee concerned;

23.  Welcomes the participation of the EP Co-President of the JPA in the informal meetings of EU Ministers for Development and in the 7th Summit of ACP Heads of State and Government;

24.  Calls on the Commission to continue the practice of providing answers in writing beforehand to the oral questions tabled at each session of the Assembly;

25.  Calls on the states that have not yet done so to ratify the revised Cotonou Agreement;

26.  Commends Commissioner Piebalgs for his dedicated involvement and the high quality of his contribution to the work of the JPA;

27.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the ACP Council, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the JPA Bureau, and the Governments and Parliaments of Denmark, Suriname, Ireland and Ethiopia.

(1) OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.
(2) OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 4.
(3) OJ L 287, 4.11.2010, p. 3.
(4) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0273.
(5) OJ C 231, 26.9.2003, p. 68.
(6) OJ C 64, 4.3.2014, p. 38.
(7) OJ L 77, 15.3.2014, p. 44.
(8) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0571.
(9) Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0076.
(10) OJ L 266, 5.9.2014, p. 145.
(11) OJ L 266, 5.9.2014, p. 158.
(12) OJ L 266, 5.9.2014, p. 147.
(13) APP 101.509.
(14) APP 101.351.
(15) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/intcoop/acp/2012_samoa/pdf/apia_communique_fin_en.pdf
(16) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/intcoop/acp/2012_lusaka/pdf/lusaka_communique_final_en.pdf

Legal notice