Li jmiss 
 Test sħiħ 
Proċedura : 2016/0204(APP)
Ċiklu ta' ħajja waqt sessjoni
Ċikli relatati mad-dokumenti :

Testi mressqa :


Dibattiti :

PV 31/05/2017 - 18
CRE 31/05/2017 - 18

Votazzjonijiet :

PV 01/06/2017 - 7.7
PV 01/06/2017 - 7.8
Spjegazzjoni tal-votazzjoni

Testi adottati :


Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti
L-Erbgħa, 31 ta' Mejju 2017 - Brussell Edizzjoni riveduta

18. Qafas Pluriennali għall-Aġenzija tal-UE għad-Drittijiet Fundamentali għall-2018-2022 - Qafas Pluriennali għall-Aġenzija tal-UE għad-Drittijiet Fundamentali għall-2018-2022 (dibattitu)
Vidjow tat-taħditiet

  Przewodniczący. – Kolejnym punktem porządku dnia jest wspólna debata na temat:

– zalecenia sporządzonego przez Angelikę Mlinar w imieniu Komisji Wolności Obywatelskich, Sprawiedliwości i Spraw Wewnętrznych w sprawie zaleceń dotyczących projektu decyzji Rady ustanawiającej wieloletnie ramy prac dla Agencji Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej na lata 2018–2022 (14423/2016 - C8-0528/2016 - 2016/0204(APP)) oraz

– oświadczenia Rady i Komisji w sprawie wieloletnich ramy dla Agencji Praw Podstawowych UE na lata 2018–2022 (2017/2702(RSP)).


  Angelika Mlinar, rapporteur. – Mr President, I would like to start by expressing my sincere gratitude to the Commission, the Council and all the shadow rapporteurs for their cooperation and support during this process. As I have already said, I find the Council decision once again not to include police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the new Multiannual Framework for the Agency to be regrettable.

This is mainly for two reasons. First, I believe that from a legal point of view it is the wrong decision. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters have become part of European Union law and are therefore legally covered by the scope of the Agency’s tasks. The second reason is related to the evolving reality in the field of fundamental rights. Including police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the Multiannual Framework would better reflect the needs on the ground, by giving the Agency the right of initiative in these areas.

Currently, the Agency for Fundamental Rights can act only upon request by the institutions to provide comprehensive analyses in these areas, which are of obvious relevance to fundamental rights. A change in this direction would send a very important signal, especially given the recent and ongoing legislative developments at EU level in this field. As already mentioned, this is not the first time that the Council has refused to include these areas of competence – as suggested by the Commission in its initial proposal – hiding its political will behind a legal argument. During the past month we have had a very constructive, open and transparent interinstitutional dialogue and, as rapporteur, I could not wish for a better working method.

However, I would like to remind the Commission and the Council that the result achieved is not the end of the process, but actually the beginning. Tomorrow, hopefully – and I am pretty sure that this will happen – Parliament will give its consent to the Council decision and will vote on a joint motion for a resolution, which I proposed with the support of the majority of my colleagues in this House. The goal is to strengthen the opinions expressed by the Council and the Commission in their respective written statements, which were Parliament’s conditio sine qua non for giving our consent.

I really appreciate the will demonstrated by both institutions to improve the working procedures for the governance and functioning of the Agency for Fundamental Rights and to clarify that the Agency’s competence also includes former third-pillar matters. However, fair interinstitutional cooperation will require additional action to be taken in the near future, starting with the Council and Commission agreement on the interpretation of the Agency’s founding regulation. Moreover, without prejudice to its right of initiative, I warmly invite the Commission, once the external evaluation of the Agency has been concluded, to present the proposal for amendments to the Agency’s regulation. This revision is necessary in order to improve the procedures for governance and for the functioning of the Agency, and to align the regulation with the Lisbon Treaty.

Last but not least, I would like to thank the Agency for its good cooperation and to reiterate the importance of its work and its key role in the promotion of fundamental rights across the European Union.


  Matti Maasikas, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, I am very grateful for this opportunity to speak on behalf of the Council on the proposal for a Council Decision establishing a Multiannual Framework for the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the years 2018-2022.

Every five years the Council has to adopt this multiannual framework. It determines the thematic areas of the agency’s work on the basis of the agency’s founding Regulation (EC) No 168/2007. This is essential to ensure the continued functioning of the agency, which makes such an important contribution to fundamental rights in the Union, a work that the Council highly values.

I would like to inform you about the statement of the Council concerning the review of the Multiannual Framework 2018-2022 made in December 2016 and entered into the Council Minutes. I quote: ‘Under Article 30, paragraphs 3 and 4, of Council Regulation No 168/2007, an independent external evaluation of the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights will be carried out in 2017. As stipulated in Article 31(2) of this Regulation, the Commission, after having assessed the evaluation report and recommendations made on that basis by the Agency’s management board, may consider submitting any proposals for amendments to the Regulation which it considers necessary. In this context, the Council agrees that it will consider carefully any proposals for amendments to the Regulation that the Commission may decide to submit, including those pertaining to the remit of the Agency to cover the areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The Council further agrees that it will consider carefully any proposals to improve procedures for the governance and functioning of the agency.’

The Council trusts that this statement will enable Parliament to give its consent to the proposed next multiannual framework for the Fundamental Rights Agency. This framework will allow the agency to continue to deliver high-quality work in the area of fundamental rights in the year 2018 and beyond.




  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, first of all I would like to thank Ms Mlinar for her constructive dialogue with all parties concerned and for proposing that the European Parliament gives its consent to the Council’s draft compromise text on the Agency’s Multiannual Framework for 2018-2022.

Like the rapporteur, the Commission deeply regrets that the text agreed in the Council excludes the thematic areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and indeed this is not for the first time.

The Commission has always insisted on the inclusion of these thematic areas in the Agency's Multiannual Framework. There is no reason why the Agency should not collect data on all aspects relating to the area of freedom, security and justice, especially in the current context. Police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters are extremely important in the fight against trafficking of human beings, organised crime and combating terrorism. There are also sensitive areas from the point of view of fundamental rights. It is important that the Agency can provide support through reliable and comparable data and the collection of best practices and initiatives.

We cannot ignore the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and its consequences. The pillars have disappeared, there is only one law of the Union. The Commission will thus continue to ask the Agency to carry out tasks in these areas, even if they are kept outside the Multiannual Framework.

The Commission made all efforts to have these thematic areas in the Fundamental Rights Agency’s new framework, but the Council has unfortunately not achieved the unanimous agreement necessary. The Commission prepared a formal written declaration regretting the exclusion of the set thematic areas, which we will ask to have included in the European Parliament, as well as Coreper and Council, minutes.

Let me also underline that the external evaluation of the Fundamental Rights Agency is ongoing and will deliver its findings at the end of this year, and on that basis, the Agency’s Management Board will make recommendations to the Commission. At the end of this process we will see whether any modification to the Fundamental Rights Agency founding Regulation will prove necessary. This being said, and as also expressed by Ms Mlinar, it is crucial that the new Multiannual Framework of the Agency enters into force as of 1 January 2018. The consent of the European Parliament is essential and I would like to express my full confidence that the plenary will vote to give such consent, allowing for the final adoption of the framework in the Council by the end of this year.


  József Nagy, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, Commissioner, Minister, as the shadow rapporteur of the EPP, I would like at first to say thank you to our rapporteur Angelika Mlinar for her really great job and professional approach.

Let me remind that the mandate of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights for the next four years is to work in eight huge thematic areas, namely equality and discrimination based on sex, race, ethnic origin, or based on language, religion or political opinion. This Agency also produces research and surveys on discrimination based on disability, age or sexual orientation, or on membership of any national minority. The FRA will be responsible not only for the protection of personal data, but also for migration, asylum and integration of refugees and migrants. Other important issues are racism, xenophobia and related intolerance, as well as children’s rights.

Last, but not least, the Agency takes care of the victims of crime and access to justice. However, some of you complained about their exclusion of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. Our legal services confirmed that the current legal basis does not allow such an addition. As Madam Mlinar pointed out, it would be a highly sensitive change, but there is a possibility to adjust the thematic areas by changing the establishing regulation of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.


  Soraya Post (S&D). – Madam President, I would like to thank Angelika Milnar and other colleagues for producing this report. As a shadow from the S&D Group, I wish you good luck, because you did this work very professionally and I liked cooperating with you.

I would like to start by thanking to FRA for their excellent work, which has become essential in recent years. Just as in all the other thematic areas, we need FRA’s data and recommendations relating to the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters as well. That is why I would like to urge the Council and the Commission to make the necessary legislative changes to open the Agency’s mandate to the former third pillar matters.

I would also like, before the Commission and the Council, to express my special appreciation for FRA’s research into the situation of Roma in the EU, which is vital for monitoring the efficiency and shortcomings of the policies of the EU and those of its Member States. We especially welcome the Agency’s research—based recommendations concerning successful ways of fighting anti-Gypsyism and securing the Roma people’s access to, and enjoyment of, their human rights. It is essential that FRA continues its work in this much—neglected field.

To this end, I would like the Commission and the Council to encourage FRA to focus on anti—Gypsyism during their work on Roma issues, to prepare a study on anti—Gypsyism in the EU and in the candidate countries, and to monitor it in all the relevant fields.


  Branislav Škripek, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, we can be proud of a Union which commits to preserving the God-given gifts of life and human dignity for all of us. We should deeply value fundamental rights for all, both in our nation-states and in our cooperation.

The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) has a duty to gather data on how well we are doing and to offer solutions to the institutions and Member States seeking to safeguard them. They are servants of our Union. As such, we must carefully cost and evaluate the added value to be gained if new areas of competence are to be given to them or not.

In the past doubts have been raised over the methodology ensuring certain minorities, as we can read in the report on homophobia, transphobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity. Costly research was weakened by respondents being able to enter the data multiple times and without further checks. I cannot, therefore, support any expansion of FRA topics and I would question whether this would be given real value for taxpayers’ money.


  Nathalie Griesbeck, au nom du groupe ALDE. – Madame la Présidente, je souhaite adresser mes premiers mots aux équipes et au directeur de l’Agence pour les remercier pour leurs travaux et pour leurs recherches, qui nourrissent indubitablement nos travaux parlementaires, pour l’expertise aussi qu’ils ont développée. Je voudrais rappeler – comme l’ont fait les collègues – l’importance de leur rôle dans la promotion des droits et des libertés fondamentales, et ce à travers toute l’Union européenne.

Deux points rapidement. Premièrement, sur le cadre pluriannuel de travail de l’Agence – comme cela a été souligné par les collègues et comme cela a été évoqué par Mme la commissaire –, je regrette aussi vivement l’absence des deux thématiques de coopération policière et de coopération judiciaire en matière pénale dans le cadre pluriannuel de l’Agence, alors que ces thématiques sont de toute évidence pertinentes pour les droits fondamentaux et qu’il y a évidemment, aujourd’hui même, beaucoup à faire en termes de respect des droits dans ce domaine. Je le déplore d’autant plus que le programme démontre la capacité de l’Agence à s’adapter, en général, aux nouvelles réalités de notre société européenne.

Et notre accord aujourd’hui, Madame la Commissaire, Monsieur le représentant du Conseil, ne vous est donné au fond qu’à une condition: que le règlement portant création de l’Agence soit modifié rapidement pour qu’elle soit enfin compétente dans tous les domaines touchant aux droits fondamentaux, c’est-à-dire à ces coopérations policière et judiciaire.

Enfin, deuxièmement, notre Union est fondée sur des valeurs. Ces dernières font l’objet de menaces systémiques envers l’État de droit et je souhaiterais qu’on puisse accorder une plus grande indépendance à l’Agence, et qu’elle ait un pouvoir d’autosaisine et d’investigation, pour être véritablement, non seulement indépendante mais aussi impartiale et forte, et être ainsi à la hauteur de nos ambitions et de nos valeurs européennes.


  Marina Albiol Guzmán, en nombre del Grupo GUE/NGL. – Señora presidenta, las instituciones europeas no son las más cercanas a los ciudadanos y ciudadanas, la verdad, y por eso hay bastante desconocimiento de cómo funcionan. Por una parte, tenemos los informes legislativos, los que luego se convierten en directivas, reglamentos, que son de obligado cumplimiento, digamos, y, por otra parte, tenemos los informes no legislativos, las declaraciones, las recomendaciones, que no es que no sirvan para nada, pero más bien para poco. En realidad, en muchas ocasiones, para lo que sirven es para blanquear a la Unión Europea o para que parezca que determinados grupos políticos de esta Cámara son progresistas.

Hoy, por ejemplo, tenemos aquí la Recomendación sobre el marco plurianual para la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales de la UE. Claro, este es de los del segundo tipo —de segunda clase—, y por eso habla de promover la igualdad, de no discriminación, de integración para las personas migrantes, de lucha contra la xenofobia y de lucha contra la gitanofobia. Y estarán de acuerdo con estas cuestiones las mismas personas que hace unas semanas votaban a favor de un informe —ese sí, legislativo— para deportar a las personas migrantes.

El marco plurianual para la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales será estupendo. Y yo me alegro. Pero ¿de qué sirve? ¿De qué sirve si continúan construyendo vallas en las fronteras, si continúan obligando a las personas trans a la esterilización o si continúan segregando a los niños y niñas gitanos en las escuelas? La verdad es que no servirá más bien para nada. Servirá, en todo caso, para que parezca que a algunas personas de esta Cámara les preocupan los derechos humanos.


  Ulrike Lunacek, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Madam President, first of all, I would like to thank colleague rapporteur Angelika Mlinar and all the shadows for the very good cooperation and very proactive attitude in trying to get through what the majority here wants. I would also like to say a big thank you to the Fundamental Rights Agency for all the great work it has been doing, all the staff there, for supporting us in our work for fundamental rights inside the European Union.

What the Fundamental Rights Agency has been doing over these last years is something we definitely need. It is unique in providing reliable and comparative data, EU-wide data and studies, on all kinds of discrimination that human beings on this continent still face, be it because of being Roma, as has been mentioned already by my colleague Soraya Post, but also LGBTI people, asylum seekers and migrants. On data protection, the rights of children and disability too, we get such important material and studies for our work in all those fields from the Fundamental Rights Agency.

The case that we have here now – and it has been said by all of us who have been shadowing – is one of the examples where the Commission and Parliament have done a lot together to move ahead. It is the Council and the Member States that simply do not follow what has been on the table since the Lisbon Treaty. As both Commissioner Jourová and Angelika Mlinar have been saying, there is no reason why – in times of terrorism and the fight against terror and organised crime – police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters should not be included. There is no reason for that, so reluctantly my political group, the Verts/ALE, will give consent but I really want to see progress on that in the very near future, and I am addressing that to the Council.


  Beatrix von Storch, im Namen der EFDD-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Es geht hier jetzt also und das Mehrjahresprogramm für die Grundrechteagentur.

Wir müssen uns mal fragen: Was macht diese Agentur eigentlich? Sie macht Umfragen und sie erstellt Statistiken. Das macht Eurostat auch. Die Frage ist: Was liefert diese Agentur für die Allgemeinheit? Meine Feststellung: Sie liefert nichts und auch keinen gesellschaftlichen Mehrwert.

In erster Linie ist diese Agentur die Betreiberin und die Vorreiterin für die Gender— Ideologie und sie ist Steigbügelhalter für die LSBTTIQ Lobby. Dafür wird gearbeitet. Die EU will mit dieser Grundrechteagentur Werte und Normen steuern und auf Kosten der Allgemeinheit Werte und Normen formieren. Diese Werte-Planwirtschaft wird dann als Schutz der Grundrechte bezeichnet. Deswegen bin ich der Meinung, man kann diese Grundrechteagentur ohne größeren Verlust einfach auflösen.


  Auke Zijlstra, namens de ENF-Fractie. – De Europese Unie legt eindeloos nadruk op het blijkbare recht van de hele wereld om zich hier te vestigen. Maar tegelijkertijd hoeft die immigrant zich niet cultureel of in gedrag te binden aan zijn nieuwe land en mag hij vervolgens ook zijn hele gezin ophalen. Voorzitter, we mogen onze grenzen niet meer beschermen en we kunnen nu zelfs onze eigen kinderen niet meer beschermen tegen het dagelijkse geweld van de islam, dat we zelfs nu nog importeren. Ondertussen moet er wel opnieuw geld naar een EU-Bureau voor de grondrechten, dat zich al sinds de oprichting drukker maakt over daderprofilering en islamofobie dan over de slachtoffers van de islam. De jihadist die in Manchester heeft toegeslagen, had recht op verblijf en het recht om zijn islamitische religie uit te oefenen, wat hij dan ook deed. Maar de kinderen, zijn uiteengereten slachtoffers, hadden geen recht op veiligheid. De lafheid en het wegkijken van onze politieke elite is onbegrijpelijk. Voorzitter, waar hebben we dit aan verdiend?


  Udo Voigt (NI). – Frau Präsidentin! Ich halte diesen Beschluss des Rates für Augenwischerei. Wie wollen Sie Diskriminierung, unter anderem wegen der Weltanschauung, der politischen oder sonstigen Anschauungen verhindern, wenn gleichzeitig in EU-Ländern wie Griechenland und der Slowakei unter Ihren Augen Parteiverbotsverfahren organisiert und Menschen wegen ihrer politischen Überzeugung verfolgt und inhaftiert werden und ihre berufliche Existenz vernichtet wird?

Einer der größten politischen Prozesse in der Geschichte meines Landes, der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, ist gestern eingestellt worden. Das Verfahren gegen das Aktionsbüro Mittelrhein richtete sich anfangs gegen 26 Angeklagte und währte fünf Jahre. Viele der Angeklagten saßen fast zwei Jahre unschuldig in Untersuchungshaft.

Ein ähnliches politisches Verfahren richtete sich in der BRD gegen den Juristen Horst Mahler, früher Rote-Armee-Fraktion, dann Verteidiger im NPD-Verbotsverfahren. 2009 wurde er nur wegen Meinungsäußerungen zu Freiheitsstrafen von insgesamt zwölf Jahren verurteilt. Heute soll der 81jährige, dem im Gefängnis der linke Unterschenkel amputiert wurde, durch halb Europa verschleppt werden, um die restlichen dreieinhalb Jahre hinter Gittern zu verbringen. Derartige politische Verfahren sind Belege dafür, dass es Ihnen, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen der Christ- und Sozialdemokraten, die sich Europas Völker zur Beute machen, trotz Entschließungen und Beschlüssen in erster Linie darum zu gehen scheint, Opposition mundtot zu machen.

Machen sie Ernst mit der Agentur für Grundrechte. Behandeln Sie endlich in Europa alle Menschen gleich.


  Csaba Sógor (PPE). – Elnök Asszony, az Alapjogi Ügynökség 2018–2022 közötti többéves keretének tematikus területei kapcsán a tanácsi határozattervezet – ellentétben a Bizottság javaslatával – tételesen tartalmazza az egyenlőség és megkülönböztetés-mentesség különböző fajtáit, ahogy az Alapjogi Charta 21. cikkében is szerepel. Így a nemzeti kisebbséghez tartozás és a nyelv alapján történő diszkriminációt is. Ez üdvözlendő tény, és ezért a tanácsi határozattervezetet támogathatónak tartom, ám fontos hangsúlyozni, hogy bár a mostani többéves keret tematikus területei között is szerepel a nemzeti kisebbséghez tartozás alapján történő diszkrimináció, a FRA 2017-es jelentése az alapvető jogokról egyáltalán nem foglalkozik a nemzeti kisebbségekkel.

Az ügynökség évek óta úgy tesz, mintha ez a kategória egyáltalán nem létezne az Unióban, holott a kisebbségi nyelvekkel együtt 60 millió uniós polgárról beszélünk. Míg más kisebbségi csoportokkal külön alfejezetekben foglakozik a jelentés, a nemzeti kisebbségek problémái egyáltalán nem jelennek meg. Ideje belátni, hogy az egyenlő bánásmód nem jelent esélyegyenlőséget, az őshonos nemzeti kisebbségeknek pozitív megkülönböztetésre van szükségük a valódi esélyegyenlőséghez.


  Cécile Kashetu Kyenge (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, nella selezione delle tematiche per il 2018-2022 dell'Agenzia per i diritti fondamentali si è scelta la continuità, continuità con le materie precedenti che rispecchiano le priorità dell'Unione europea nel campo dei diritti fondamentali e consentiranno un proseguimento fluido del lavoro dell'Agenzia.

Tuttavia, auspico che l'Agenzia, nell'ambito di queste tematiche stabilite, includa il tema specifico dell'afrofobia, discriminazione su base etnico-razziale degli afrodiscendenti, fenomeno in forte crescita nell'Unione europea, ma ancora poco conosciuto.

Sono necessari dati e ricerche approfondite per documentare tutte le forme che l'afrofobia può assumere nei diversi Stati membri come marginalizzazione, "profilaggio" etnico, discorsi e crimini d'odio, documentazione necessaria per poter elaborare strategie efficaci per la lotta contro l'afrofobia e per avanzare sulla legislazione antidiscriminazione con un approccio olistico.


  Gilles Lebreton (ENF). – Madame la Présidente, le respect des droits de l’homme est essentiel. La France le sait puisqu’elle les a proclamés dès 1789, mais fallait-il créer une Agence spécifique pour donner aux États des conseils en matière de droits de l’homme? Je ne le pense pas.

L’Agence des droits fondamentaux de l’Union est un monstre bureaucratique qui nous coûte 22 millions d’euros par an pour des résultats quasi nuls. Au lieu de se remettre en cause, elle a tenté de s’accaparer deux nouveaux domaines: la coopération policière et la coopération judiciaire en matière pénale. Heureusement, le Conseil s’y est opposé.

Le pire est que l’Agence a développé une conception communautariste des droits de l’homme qui est aux antipodes de la conception républicaine française. Dans son rapport 2017, l’Agence l’avoue au paragraphe 2.4, en recommandant aux États – je cite – de promouvoir l’inclusion, notamment en organisant l’expression du communautarisme religieux dans l’espace public.

C’est contraire à la tradition française d’assimilation et c’est pourquoi je m’oppose fermement à cette Agence.


  Milan Zver (PPE). – Najprej bi se rad zahvalil Angeliki Mlinar za pripravo osnutka zakonodajne resolucije, tega priporočila. Čestitam tudi FRA, torej agenciji, za desetletnico obstoja.

Tako kot poročevalka tudi sam pogrešam v tem novem večletnem okviru tematsko območje policijske in pravosodno sodelovanje v kazenskih zadevah. Poznam delo agencije, pred leti sem bil obiskal tudi predsednika, direktorja agencije in mu predstavil eklatantno kršenje človekovih pravic v primeru Patria v moji državi, vendar brez pravega, ustreznega odziva.

Tako da se mi zdi, da bi bilo dobro, da bi agencija razširila svoje dejavnosti in tudi pristojnosti. Želel bi, da bi tudi delovala nekoliko bolj drugače. Morda bi bilo dobro, da bi poskušala opravljati izvirne raziskave, ne samo na podlagi uradnih podatkov in informacij, ki jih dobivajo od držav članic, ampak da bi opravila svoje izvirne raziskave o stanju demokracije in spoštovanju človekovih pravic in svoboščin v državah članicah.


„Catch the eye” eljárás


  Νότης Μαριάς ( ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ο Ευρωπαϊκός Οργανισμός Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων θα προσέφερε ιδιαίτερες υπηρεσίες αν είχε να ασχοληθεί με την παραβίαση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων στην πατρίδα μου. Στην Ελλάδα, η τρόικα έχει επιβάλει μνημονιακές πολιτικές που έχουν οδηγήσει εκατομμύρια συμπολίτες μου στην ανεργία. Η τρόικα έχει πετσοκόψει μισθούς και συντάξεις, έχει επιβάλει φορολεηλασία στα εισοδήματα και στις περιουσίες των Ελλήνων, περιουσίες οι οποίες βγαίνουν πλέον σε πλειστηριασμό.

Η τρόικα έχει βυθίσει πλέον στη φτώχεια τον ελληνικό λαό. Επομένως, το Εurogroup και η τρόικα, στην οποία συμμετέχει η Επιτροπή και η Ευρωπαϊκή Κεντρική Τράπεζα, παραβιάζουν τα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα των Ελλήνων πολιτών, όπως προστατεύονται απ’ την Ευρωπαϊκή Χάρτα Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων. Παραβιάζουν το δικαίωμα στην αξιοπρεπή διαβίωση, παραβιάζουν το δικαίωμα προστασίας της ιδιωτικής περιουσίας, παραβιάζουν το δικαίωμα στην εργασία μια και κλείνουν πλέον χιλιάδες μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις. Τι θα γίνει με το ζήτημα αυτό; Θα υπάρξει προστασία πλέον των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων στην Ελλάδα;


(A „catch the eye” eljárás vége.)


  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you, honourable Members, for all your contributions and once again I share your concerns and I very much regret the Council's position on the exclusion of cooperation in criminal matters and judicial cooperation.

I heard here the question: why do we have a Fundamental Rights Agency? I find it quite important in simple words to reiterate what the Agency does and why we have it. The Agency is doing targeted research, mapping the situation, explaining the trends, collecting data and providing all those findings to us, to politicians, so that we can take responsible political decisions. Too much is at stake now and we politicians must make proper and right decisions, especially now at a time of brainwashing of our society through fake news. I would even say that, maybe with some pathos, we said we have an existential need of truth-based evidence which will enable us to take the proper responsible decisions.

An hour ago here in this plenary session there was a very important debate about how to combat anti-semitism and we also spoke about the rise of hatred in the EU in relation to other groups of people, too. We spoke about anti-Gypsyism and about the hatred against the LGBT community and against other vulnerable groups of people, and so I would like to stress here that the Fundamental Rights Agency should deal also with the matters connected to this, especially criminal justice, because we need to make sure that all these groups of people are secure and safe in the EU, and we need to have the proper data to guide us in what we should do on this in the field of judiciary and police cooperation.

So this is why the Commission is now disappointed by the position of the Agency. Anyway, I would like to repeat my hopes that the European Parliament will vote positively on the Multiannual Framework of the Agency and we will look into the possibilities on how to improve the situation in the future for the FRA so that it can do the proper work which we all need so seriously.


The Commission regrets the lack of agreement on the inclusion of the proposed new thematic areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights' Multiannual Framework for 2018-2022.

The Commission recalls that following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters have become part of Union law and are therefore covered by the scope of the tasks of the Agency, as all areas falling within the competences of the Union, under Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) n°168/2007.

If these thematic areas are not included in the Council Decision establishing a Multiannual Framework for the Agency for 2018-2022, the Agency will continue to carry out its tasks in these areas upon request from the European Parliament, the Council or the Commission, under Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) n°168/2007.

Following the external evaluation of the Agency in 2017, the Commission shall transmit the evaluation reports and recommendations to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions and make them public.

After having assessed the evaluation report and recommendations, the Commission may submit any proposals for amendments to Regulation (EC) n°168/2007 which it considers necessary, as provided in Article 31(2) thereof.


  Matti Maasikas, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, let me first say again that the Council attaches great importance to the work done by the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) in the area of fundamental rights. At the same time the Council is not convinced that the scope of FRA’s task should be extended before the evaluation exercise related to this agency. The exercise that is under way already has been concluded and evaluated, as highlighted by Commissioner Jourová.

For the future, the Council will consider carefully any proposals for amendments to the FRA Regulation that the Commission might decide to submit. This includes the possible amendments to extend the remit of the Agency also in the areas of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters.

I am not in a position to say more at this stage. I speak on behalf of the Council and therefore on behalf of all its members, but I can assure you that the Council will follow the debate closely, and I have paid particular attention to all the valuable opinions expressed here today.


  Angelika Mlinar, rapporteur. – Madam President, I would just to like to wrap up what you have all heard here. It is very clear that the work of the Agency for Fundamental Rights is highly appreciated in this House and that we really rely on all the information it provides. The quality of the Agency is beyond question, and this is something that we have to be aware of. We have a rare jewel here. I say this sincerely, also from my point of view as a human rights lawyer in a former life or when I had a different career.

You can see that you have a huge majority here in this House for the enlargement of its scope. I understand your position, but you can also be sure that we will not give up. I am quite well known for being persistent, so – with the support of the Commission, which we fully support in its approach – we will come back to you after the evaluation exercise, which will soon be over. I really hope that the Member States will then also appreciate the situation of the Parliament and the position here in the House, namely that we do not see this as an enlargement, but just an adjustment in the alignment of the scope according to the Treaty of the European Union.


  Elnök asszony. – Egy állásfoglalásra irányuló indítványt juttattak el hozzám, melyet az eljárási szabályzat 123. cikkének (2) bekezdésével összhangban nyújtottak be.

A közös vitát lezárom.

A szavazásra 2017. június 1-jén, csütörtökön kerül sor.

Írásbeli nyilatkozatok (162. cikk)


  Lorenzo Cesa (PPE), per iscritto. – Ritengo doveroso il sostegno alla relazione sul Quadro pluriennale per l'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per i diritti fondamentali, per il quale anche la commissione Affari esteri, ha espresso il suo parere favorevole. Credo tuttavia che, la mancanza di un accordo in seno al Consiglio, riguardo all'inclusione dei settori tematici della cooperazione di polizia e giudiziaria in materia penale, sia una grave lacuna per i poteri di questa Agenzia. Non sarà quindi possibile nei prossimi anni per questa istituzione, compiere di propria iniziativa, analisi nei settori che hanno un'evidente pertinenza con i diritti fondamentali. Ci auguriamo che prossimamente Consiglio e Commissione rivedano questa decisione, che permetterebbe di dare un segnale importante ai cittadini, in tema di diritti umani.


  Paloma López Bermejo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – Me alegro del amplio consenso parlamentario para apoyar la labor de la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea (FRA). Al igual que la ponente, lamento que el Consejo de la UE haya dejado fuera del nuevo marco plurianual temas como la cooperación policial y judicial, que habían sido recomendados por el Consejo de Administración de la FRA, pero no dudo de que la Agencia sabrá orientar su actividad en el marco más general de la Carta de los Derechos Fundamentales de la UE. Pongo como ejemplo el trabajo realizado por la FRA en su estudio de 2015 sobre la explotación laboral severa. Centrado en la situación de los trabajadores migrantes —quienes sufren desproporcionadamente las formas de explotación más grave (esclavitud, prostitución...) —, el trabajo ampliaba el foco a realidades como las de los sectores doméstico, agrícola, hotelero o de la construcción, en los que muchas formas de explotación laboral severa pasan generalmente desapercibidas. Las conclusiones, tales como el recurso al artículo 83, apartado 2, del TFUE para establecer normas mínimas europeas que permitan sancionar penalmente las infracciones en las políticas sociales, representan un ejemplo concreto de propuesta innovadora que reconoce que los derechos laborales son parte integrante de los derechos fundamentales que la UE debe proteger.


  Claude Rolin (PPE), par écrit. – Monsieur le commissaire, mesdames, messieurs, chers collègues, je vous invite à soutenir le texte de cette résolution notamment parce qu'il prévoit l'inclusion des domaines de la coopération judiciaire en matière pénale et de la coopération policière dans le cadre pluriannuel.

Ceci reflèterait non seulement les besoins concrets sur le terrain en ces temps troublés, mais permettrait encore à l'Agence européenne des droits fondamentaux d'entreprendre de sa propre initiative une analyse approfondie de domaines qui sont, de toute évidence, pertinents pour les droits de l'homme, au regard notamment de l'évolution que connaît l'Union européenne depuis peu sur le plan législatif.

Je rappelle ici l'importance - sans cesse grandissante - de la mission de l'Agence et le rôle primordial qu'elle est amenée à jouer au quotidien dans la défense des droits fondamentaux au sein de l'UE.


  Janusz Zemke (S&D), na piśmie. – Statutowym celem agencji jest dostarczanie instytucjom Unii oraz państwom członkowskim pomocy i wiedzy specjalistycznej w zakresie praw podstawowych przy wdrażaniu przez nie prawa unijnego. Dziedziny tematyczne działalności agencji są określane w wieloletnich ramach prac obowiązujących przez okres pięcioletni.

W projekcie omawianej decyzji Rada zaproponowała, by w latach 2018–2022 agencja skupiała się na sytuacji ofiar przestępstw i dostępie do wymiaru sprawiedliwości, kwestiach równości i niedyskryminacji, zagadnieniach społeczeństwa informacyjnego, poszanowaniu życia prywatnego i ochronie danych osobowych, współpracy sądowej, z wyjątkiem spraw karnych, migracji i integracji uchodźców, a ponadto prawach dziecka i integracji społecznej Romów.

Podzielam opinię sprawozdawcy, że Parlament powinien – w trakcie zamkniętych już negocjacji – silniej akcentować potrzebę włączenia do wieloletnich ram współpracy policyjnej i współpracy w sprawach karnych. Stanowiłoby to bowiem nie tylko odzwierciedlenie istniejących potrzeb lokalnych, lecz umożliwiłoby również agencji dostarczenie – z własnej inicjatywy – kompleksowej analizy w dziedzinach mających oczywiste znaczenie dla praw podstawowych.

Uważam ponadto, że agencja powinna w nieodległej perspektywie przejąć od Komisji Weneckiej, będącej organem Rady Europy, zadanie dostarczania Komisji Europejskiej fachowej ekspertyzy w zakresie poszanowania praworządności w państwach członkowskich, a także analizy sytuacji ich obywateli (będących zarazem obywatelami Unii Europejskiej), których prawa podstawowe są również naruszane w efekcie sprzecznych z zasadami państwa prawa działań organów krajowych.

Avviż legali - Politika tal-privatezza