Ska KELLER : 8th parliamentary term 

Political groups 

  • 01-07-2014 / 13-12-2016 : Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance - Vice-Chair
  • 14-12-2016 / 01-07-2019 : Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance - Co-Chair

National parties 

  • 01-07-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (Germany)

Member 

  • 01-07-2014 / 18-01-2017 : Committee on International Trade
  • 14-07-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee
  • 14-07-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Delegation to the Cariforum-EU Parliamentary Committee
  • 14-12-2016 / 04-07-2017 : Conference of Presidents
  • 05-07-2017 / 01-07-2019 : Conference of Presidents

Substitute 

  • 01-07-2014 / 18-01-2017 : Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
  • 14-07-2014 / 01-07-2019 : Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee
  • 19-01-2017 / 01-07-2019 : Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Main parliamentary activities 

Contributions to plenary debates 
Speeches made during the plenary session and written declarations relating to plenary debates. Rules Rule 204 and 171(11)

Reports - as rapporteur 
A rapporteur is appointed in the responsible parliamentary committee to draft a report on proposals of a legislative or budgetary nature, or other issues. In drafting their report, rapporteurs may consult with relevant experts and stakeholders. They are also responsible for the drafting of compromise amendments and negotiations with shadow rapporteurs. Reports adopted at committee level are then examined and voted on in plenary. Rule 55

Opinions - as rapporteur 
Committees may draft an opinion to a report of the responsible committee covering the elements linked to their committee remit. Rapporteurs of such opinions are also responsible for the drafting of compromise amendments and negotiations with shadow rapporteurs of the opinion. Rule 56, Rule 57, Annex VI

OPINION on the role of the EU within the UN – how to better achieve EU foreign policy goals  
- INTA_AD(2015)560834 -  
-
INTA 

Opinions - as shadow rapporteur 
Political groups designate a shadow rapporteur for an opinion to follow progress and negotiate compromise texts with the rapporteur. Rule 215

OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of electronic road toll systems and facilitating cross-border exchange of information on the failure to pay road fees in the Union (recast)  
- LIBE_AD(2018)616760 -  
-
LIBE 
OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing and amending Directive 2009/101/EC  
- INTA_AD(2016)594132 -  
-
INTA 
OPINION on the implementation of the European Fund for Strategic Investments  
- INTA_AD(2016)589274 -  
-
INTA 

Oral questions 
Questions for oral answer with debate, addressed to the European Commission, the Council or the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union can be tabled by a committee, a political group or at least 5% of Parliament’s members. Rule 136

Other parliamentary activities 

Written explanations of vote 
Members can submit a written explanation of their vote in plenary. Rule 194

Combating terrorism (A8-0228/2016 - Monika Hohlmeier)  
 

. ‒ I would like to explain why I voted against the directive on combating terrorism.
While I agree with the general objective of harmonising the definitions of terrorist offences at EU level, I believe this directive contains major flaws. I am concerned about the definitions of terrorist offences in Article 3, since they include destruction of infrastructure likely to cause ‘a major economic loss’. Governments could use this to muzzle acts of civil disobedience or NGOs, including environmental groups. I believe that terrorism should be defined as an act of violence that endangers human lives, not business.
I am alarmed by Article 5 on public provocation to terrorism, which criminalises ‘indirect’ provocation to commit a terrorist offence. Nobody knows what this entails, and it is likely to lead to abuses to freedom of expression. Read in conjunction with Article 21 on the blocking of websites, the notion of indirect provocation is very dangerous.
Finally, I am critical of Article 9 on the criminalisation of travelling. I still do not see the point of criminalising the travelling in itself, since other offences are enough to prosecute a suspected foreign fighter. The fact that intra-EU travel is also covered makes me anxious for our freedom of movement.

Written questions 
Members can submit a specific number of questions to the President of the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative of the Union, for written answer. Rule 138, Annex III

Declarations 

Declaration of financial interests 

Contact