European Parliament decision of 9 March 2021 on the request for waiver of the immunity of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó (2020/2024(IMM))

P9_TA(2021)0059 A9-0020/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity received on 13 January 2020 and transmitted by the President of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court) and made by the President of the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo in connection with special proceedings No 3/20907/2017 on 10 January 2020; having regard to the announcement of the said request for waiver of immunity in plenary on 16 January 2020,

–  having heard Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó in accordance with Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

–  having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21 October 2008, 19 March 2010, 6 September 2011, 17 January 2013 and 19 December 2019(1),

–  having regard to the decision of the Spanish Junta Electoral Central (Central Electoral Board) of 13 June 2019(2),

–  having regard to the announcement made in plenary on 13 January 2020 that following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 19 December 2019, Parliament took note of the election of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó as Member of the European Parliament with effect from 2 July 2019,

–  having regard to Article 71(1) and (2) of the Spanish Constitution,

–  having regard to Rule 5(2), Rule 6(1) and Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0020/2021),

A.  whereas the President of the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo requested the waiver of the immunity of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó, Member of the European Parliament, with regard to Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union in connection with special proceedings No 3/20907/2017 – the criminal proceedings for an alleged offence of sedition, as laid down in Articles 544 and 545 of the Spanish Criminal Code, and of an offence of misuse of public funds, as laid down in Article 432 of the Spanish Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 252 thereof;

B.  whereas the acts subject to prosecution were allegedly committed in 2017; whereas the order of prosecution in this case was issued on 21 March 2018 and confirmed by subsequent orders dismissing appeals; whereas the investigation was closed by order of 9 July 2018 and confirmed as final on 25 October 2018; whereas by order of 9 July 2018 Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó, among others, was declared to be in contempt of court and a decision was taken to stay proceedings in relation to him and other persons until they had been found;

C.  whereas following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 19 December 2019, Parliament took note of the election of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó as Member of the European Parliament with effect from 2 July 2019;

D.  whereas the status as Member of the European Parliament was acquired with effect on 13 June 2019; whereas the request for the waiver of immunity therefore concerns facts and prosecution that pre-date the acquisition of the status and thereby of the immunity as Member of the European Parliament;

E.  whereas the Committee on Legal Affairs took note of the documents presented to Members of the Committee by Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó pursuant to Rule 9(6) of the Rules of Procedure and considered by him relevant to the procedure;

F.  whereas Member States’ authorities decide on the appropriateness of the court proceedings;

G.  whereas it is not for the European Parliament to query the merits of national legal and judicial systems;

H.  whereas the European Parliament lacks any competence to assess or query the jurisdiction of the national judicial authorities in charge of the criminal proceedings under consideration;

I.  whereas in accordance with Spanish law as interpreted by the national courts and as communicated to Parliament by the Member State in question, the Second Criminal Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo is the competent authority to request the waiver of immunity of a Member of the European Parliament;

J.  whereas the proceedings do not concern opinions expressed or votes cast in the performance of the duties of the Member of the European Parliament for the purposes of Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

K.  whereas Article 9, first paragraph, point (a), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union states that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of their own state, the immunities accorded to members of the parliament of that state;

L.  whereas Article 71(1) and (2) of the Spanish Constitution provides that:

‘1. Deputies and senators shall enjoy absolute privilege in respect of opinions expressed in the performance of their duties;

2. During their term of office, deputies and senators shall also have immunity and may only be arrested if they are found in the act of committing an offence. They cannot be charged or prosecuted without the prior authorisation of the relevant legislative chamber’;

M.  whereas the request for the waiver of immunity informs, with regard to the application of Article 71 of the Spanish Constitution and, specifically, the stage of proceedings as of which it is not necessary to request parliamentary authorisation to carry out criminal proceedings against an accused person who acquires the status of member of parliament, that a waiver request is not necessary in cases where the status of member of parliament is acquired while a previously opened trial is ongoing or in cases where a member of parliament takes office after formally being prosecuted; whereas it is not therefore required to request a waiver of immunity under Article 9, first paragraph, point (a), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union in order for measures to be taken in the territory of Spain;

N.  whereas it is not for the European Parliament to interpret the domestic rules on the privileges and immunities of Members of Parliament;

O.  whereas Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union states that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings;

P.  whereas on 14 October 2019 the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo ordered to issue ‘(i)n order for criminal proceedings to take place [...] as appropriate: a national arrest warrant, a European arrest warrant or an international arrest warrant for the purposes of extradition’ in respect of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó, who was confirmed to be in contempt of court; whereas, as explained in the request for the waiver of immunity, on 10 January 2020 the appeal against this decision was dismissed with regard to the revocation of ‘the relevant national search, arrest and detention warrants, as well as the international and European arrest warrants’ and upheld ‘against the order of 14 October 2019 and the ruling of 18 October 2018, [...] pursuant to the interpretation given by the CJEU in its judgment of 19 December 2019 recognising the appellant(s)’ privileges and immunities under Article 9 of Protocol No 7 to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in their capacity as Member(s) of the European Parliament’, and it was also decided to request that the European Parliament waive the immunity of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó ‘in order to proceed with the execution of the European arrest warrant(s) that have been issued’ and to inform the executing authority in Belgium thereof;

Q.  whereas, pursuant to Rule 9(8) of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Legal Affairs shall not, under any circumstances, pronounce on the guilt or otherwise of the Member, nor on whether or not the opinions or acts attributed to the Member justify prosecution, even if, in considering the request, the Committee acquires detailed knowledge of the facts of the case;

R.  whereas in accordance with Rule 5(2) of the Rules of Procedure, parliamentary immunity is not a Member’s personal privilege but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and of its Members;

S.  whereas the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

T.  whereas the accusation clearly bears no relation to the position of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó as Member of the European Parliament but to his former position as the President of the Generalitat (Government) of Catalonia;

U.  whereas Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó is one of the individuals among a group of individuals who find themselves in a similar situation of being prosecuted and charged with the offences in question, with the only difference being that he currently enjoys immunity as a Member of the European Parliament; whereas it should therefore be borne in mind that Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó is not the only prosecuted person in the case in question;

V.  whereas the incriminated facts were committed in 2017 and the criminal proceedings in question were initiated against Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó in 2018; whereas on this basis, it cannot be claimed that the judicial proceedings were launched with the intention of hindering the future political activity of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó as a Member of the European Parliament, when at that time his status as a Member of the European Parliament was still hypothetical and future;

W.  whereas in this case, Parliament has thus found no evidence of fumus persecutionis, i.e. factual elements which indicate that the intention underlying the legal proceeding may be to damage a Member’s political activity and thus the European Parliament;

1.  Decides to waive the immunity of Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó under Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its committee responsible immediately to the Spanish authorities and to Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó.

(1) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2008, Marra v De Gregorio and Clemente, C-200/07 and C-201/07, ECLI:EU:C:2008:579; judgment of the General Court of 19 March 2010, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-42/06, ECLI:EU:T:2010:102; judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 September 2011, Patriciello, C-163/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:543; judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2013, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-346/11 and T-347/11, ECLI:EU:T:2013:23; judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 December 2019, Junqueras Vies, C-502/19, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1115. (2) Boletín Oficial del Estado, No 142, 14 June 2019, pp. 62477-62478.

European Parliament decision of 9 March 2021 on the request for waiver of the immunity of Antoni Comín i Oliveres (2020/2025(IMM))

P9_TA(2021)0060 A9-0021/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity received on 13 January 2020 and transmitted by the President of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court) and made by the President of the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo in connection with special proceedings No 3/20907/2017 on 10 January 2020; having regard to the announcement of the said request for waiver of immunity in plenary on 16 January 2020,

–  having heard Antoni Comín i Oliveres in accordance with Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

–  having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21 October 2008, 19 March 2010, 6 September 2011, 17 January 2013 and 19 December 2019(1),

–  having regard to the decision of the Spanish Junta Electoral Central (Central Electoral Board) of 13 June 2019(2),

–  having regard to the announcement made in plenary on 13 January 2020 that following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 19 December 2019, Parliament took note of the election of Antoni Comín i Oliveres as Member of the European Parliament with effect from 2 July 2019,

–  having regard to Article 71(1) and (2) of the Spanish Constitution,

–  having regard to Rule 5(2), Rule 6(1) and Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0021/2021),

A.  whereas the President of the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo requested the waiver of the immunity of Antoni Comín i Oliveres, Member of the European Parliament, with regard to Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union in connection with special proceedings No 3/20907/2017 – the criminal proceedings for an alleged offence of sedition, as laid down in Articles 544 and 545 of the Spanish Criminal Code, and of an offence of misuse of public funds, as laid down in Article 432 of the Spanish Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 252 thereof;

B.  whereas the acts subject to prosecution were allegedly committed in 2017; whereas the order of prosecution in this case was issued on 21 March 2018 and confirmed by subsequent orders dismissing appeals; whereas the investigation was closed by order of 9 July 2018 and confirmed as final on 25 October 2018; whereas by order of 9 July 2018 Antoni Comín i Oliveres, among others, was declared to be in contempt of court and a decision was taken to stay proceedings in relation to him and other persons until they had been found;

C.  whereas following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 19 December 2019, Parliament took note of the election of Antoni Comín i Oliveres as Member of the European Parliament with effect from 2 July 2019;

D.  whereas the status as Member of the European Parliament was acquired with effect on 13 June 2019; whereas the request for the waiver of immunity therefore concerns facts and prosecution that pre-date the acquisition of the status and thereby of the immunity as Member of the European Parliament;

E.  whereas the Committee on Legal Affairs took note of the documents presented to Members of the Committee by Antoni Comín i Oliveres pursuant to Rule 9(6) of the Rules of Procedure and considered by him relevant to the procedure;

F.  whereas Member States’ authorities decide on the appropriateness of the court proceedings;

G.  whereas it is not for the European Parliament to query the merits of national legal and judicial systems;

H.  whereas the European Parliament lacks any competence to assess or query the jurisdiction of the national judicial authorities in charge of the criminal proceedings under consideration;

I.  whereas in accordance with Spanish law as interpreted by the national courts and as communicated to Parliament by the Member State in question, the Second Criminal Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo is the competent authority to request the waiver of immunity of a Member of the European Parliament;

J.  whereas the proceedings do not concern opinions expressed or votes cast in the performance of the duties of the Member of the European Parliament for the purposes of Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

K.  whereas Article 9, first paragraph, point (a), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union states that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of their own state, the immunities accorded to members of the parliament of that state;

L.  whereas Article 71(1) and (2) of the Spanish Constitution provides that:

‘1. Deputies and senators shall enjoy absolute privilege in respect of opinions expressed in the performance of their duties.

2. During their term of office, deputies and senators shall also have immunity and may only be arrested if they are found in the act of committing an offence. They cannot be charged or prosecuted without the prior authorisation of the relevant legislative chamber’;

M.  whereas the request for the waiver of immunity informs, with regard to the application of Article 71 of the Spanish Constitution and, specifically, the stage of proceedings as of which it is not necessary to request parliamentary authorisation to carry out criminal proceedings against an accused person who acquires the status of member of parliament, that a waiver request is not necessary in cases where the status of member of parliament is acquired while a previously opened trial is ongoing or in cases where a member of parliament takes office after formally being prosecuted; whereas it is not therefore required to request a waiver of immunity under Article 9, first paragraph, point (a), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union in order for measures to be taken in the territory of Spain;

N.  whereas it is not for the European Parliament to interpret the domestic rules on the privileges and immunities of Members of Parliament;

O.  whereas Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union states that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings;

P.  whereas on 4 November 2019 the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo ordered to issue ‘(i)n order for criminal proceedings to take place [...] as appropriate: a national arrest warrant(s), European arrest warrant(s) or an international arrest warrant(s) for the purposes of extradition’ in respect of, among others, Antoni Comín i Oliveres, who was confirmed to be in contempt of court; whereas, as explained in the request for the waiver of immunity, on 10 January 2020 the appeal against this decision was dismissed with regard to the revocation of ‘the relevant national search, arrest and detention warrants, as well as the international and European arrest warrants’ and upheld ‘against the order of 4 November 2019, pursuant to the interpretation given by the CJEU in its judgment of 19 December 2019 recognising the appellant(s)’ privileges and immunities under Article 9 of Protocol No 7 to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in their capacity as Member(s) of the European Parliament’, and it was also decided to request that the European Parliament waive the immunity of Antoni Comín i Oliveres ‘in order to proceed with the execution of the European arrest warrant(s) that have been issued’ and to inform the executing authority in Belgium thereof;

Q.  whereas, pursuant to Rule 9(8) of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Legal Affairs shall not, under any circumstances, pronounce on the guilt or otherwise of the Member, nor on whether or not the opinions or acts attributed to the Member justify prosecution, even if, in considering the request, the Committee acquires detailed knowledge of the facts of the case;

R.  whereas in accordance with Rule 5(2) of the Rules of Procedure, parliamentary immunity is not a Member’s personal privilege but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and of its Members;

S.  whereas the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

T.  whereas the accusation clearly bears no relation to the position of Antoni Comín i Oliveres as Member of the European Parliament but to his former position as Regional Minister for Health of the Govern (Catalan regional government);

U.  whereas Antoni Comín i Oliveres is one of the individuals among a group of individuals who find themselves in a similar situation of being prosecuted and charged with the offences in question, with the only difference being that he currently enjoys immunity as a Member of the European Parliament; whereas it should therefore be borne in mind that Antoni Comín i Oliveres is not the only prosecuted person in the case in question;

V.  whereas the incriminated facts were committed in 2017 and the criminal proceedings in question were initiated against Antoni Comín i Oliveres in 2018; whereas on this basis, it cannot be claimed that the judicial proceedings were launched with the intention of hindering the future political activity of Antoni Comín i Oliveres as a Member of the European Parliament, when at that time his status as a Member of the European Parliament was still hypothetical and future;

W.  whereas in this case, Parliament has thus found no evidence of fumus persecutionis, i.e. factual elements which indicate that the intention underlying the legal proceeding may be to damage a Member’s political activity and thus the European Parliament;

1.  Decides to waive the immunity of Antoni Comín i Oliveres under Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its committee responsible immediately to the Spanish authorities and to Antoni Comín i Oliveres.

(1) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2008, Marra v De Gregorio and Clemente, C-200/07 and C-201/07, ECLI:EU:C:2008:579; judgment of the General Court of 19 March 2010, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-42/06, ECLI:EU:T:2010:102; judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 September 2011, Patriciello, C-163/10, ECLI: EU:C:2011:543; judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2013, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-346/11 and T-347/11, ECLI:EU:T:2013:23; judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 December 2019, Junqueras Vies, C-502/19, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1115. (2) Boletín Oficial del Estado, No 142, 14 June 2019, pp. 62477-62478.

European Parliament decision of 9 March 2021 on the request for waiver of the immunity of Clara Ponsatí Obiols (2020/2031(IMM))

P9_TA(2021)0061 A9-0022/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity received on 10 February 2020 and transmitted by the President of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court) and made by the President of the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo in connection with special proceedings No 3/20907/2017 on 4 February 2020; having regard to the announcement of the said request for waiver of immunity in plenary on 13 February 2020,

–  having heard Clara Ponsatí Obiols in accordance with Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

–  having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21 October 2008, 19 March 2010, 6 September 2011, 17 January 2013 and 19 December 2019(1),

–  having regard to the decision of the Spanish Junta Electoral Central (Central Electoral Board) of 23 January 2020(2),

–  having regard to European Council Decision (EU) 2018/937 of 28 June 2018 establishing the composition of the European Parliament(3) and to European Council Decision (EU) 2019/1810 taken in agreement with the United Kingdom of 29 October 2019 extending the period under Article 50(3)TEU(4),

–  having regard to the announcement made in plenary on 10 February 2020 that in accordance with the European Council’s decision of 28 June 2018 and following the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union on 31 January 2020, Parliament took note of the election of Clara Ponsatí Obiols as Member of the European Parliament with effect from 1 February 2020,

–  having regard to Article 71(1) and (2) of the Spanish Constitution,

–  having regard to Rule 5(2), Rule 6(1) and Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0022/2021),

A.  whereas the President of the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo requested the waiver of the immunity of Clara Ponsatí Obiols, Member of the European Parliament, with regard to Article 9, first paragraph, point(b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union in connection with special proceedings No 3/20907/2017 – the criminal proceedings for an alleged offence of sedition, as laid down in Articles 544 and 545 of the Spanish Criminal Code;

B.  whereas the acts subject to prosecution were allegedly committed in 2017; whereas the order of prosecution in this case was issued on 21 March 2018 and confirmed by subsequent orders dismissing appeals; whereas the investigation was closed by order of 9 July 2018 and confirmed as final on 25 October 2018; whereas by order of 9 July 2018 Clara Ponsatí Obiols, among others, was declared to be in contempt of court and a decision was taken to stay proceedings in relation to her and other persons until they had been found;

C.  whereas Clara Ponsatí Obiols was declared elected by the Spanish Junta Electoral Central (Central Electoral Board) on 23 January 2020; whereas following the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union on 31 January 2020, Parliament took note of the election of Clara Ponsatí Obiols as Member of the European Parliament with effect from 1 February 2020;

D.  whereas the status as Member of the European Parliament was acquired with effect on 23 January 2020; whereas the request for the waiver of immunity therefore concerns facts and prosecution that pre-date the acquisition of the status and thereby of the immunity as Member of the European Parliament;

E.  whereas the Committee on Legal Affairs took note of the documents presented to Members of the Committee by Clara Ponsatí Obiols pursuant to Rule 9(6) of the Rules of Procedure and considered by her relevant to the procedure;

F.  whereas Member States’ authorities decide on the appropriateness of the court proceedings;

G.  whereas it is not for the European Parliament to query the merits of national legal and judicial systems;

H.  whereas the European Parliament lacks any competence to assess or query the jurisdiction of the national judicial authorities in charge of the criminal proceedings under consideration;

I.  whereas in accordance with Spanish law as interpreted by the national courts and as communicated to Parliament by the Member State, the Second Criminal Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo is the competent authority to request the waiver of immunity of a Member of the European Parliament;

J.  whereas the proceedings do not concern opinions expressed or votes cast in the performance of the duties of the Member of the European Parliament for the purposes of Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

K.  whereas Article 9, first paragraph, point (a), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union states that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of their own state, the immunities accorded to members of the parliament of that state;

L.  whereas Article 71(1) and (2) of the Spanish Constitution provides that:

‘1. Deputies and senators shall enjoy absolute privilege in respect of opinions expressed in the performance of their duties.

2. During their term of office, deputies and senators shall also have immunity and may only be arrested if they are found in the act of committing an offence. They cannot be charged or prosecuted without the prior authorisation of the relevant legislative chamber’;

M.  whereas the request for the waiver of immunity informs, with regard to the application of Article 71 of the Spanish Constitution and, specifically, the stage of proceedings as of which it is not necessary to request parliamentary authorisation to carry out criminal proceedings against an accused person who acquires the status of member of parliament, that a waiver request is not necessary in cases where the status of member of parliament is acquired while a previously opened trial is ongoing or in cases where a member of parliament takes office after formally being prosecuted; whereas it is not therefore required to request a waiver of immunity under Article 9, first paragraph, point (a), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union in order for measures to be taken in the territory of Spain;

N.  whereas it is not for the European Parliament to interpret the domestic rules on the privileges and immunities of Members of Parliament;

O.  whereas Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union states that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings;

P.  whereas on 4 November 2019 the Second Chamber of the Spanish Tribunal Supremo ordered to issue ‘(i)n order for criminal proceedings to take place [...] as appropriate: a national arrest warrant(s), European arrest warrant(s) or an international arrest warrant(s) for the purposes of extradition’ in respect of, among others, Clara Ponsatí Obiols, who was confirmed to be in contempt of court; whereas, as explained in the request for the waiver of immunity, on 3 February 2020 the decision with regard to the issuing of the national search, arrest and detention warrant as well as the European arrest warrant and the international search and arrest warrant against Clara Ponsatí Obiols for the purpose of her extradition was upheld and, at the same time, a request for the waiver of her immunity was made in order to proceed with the execution of the European arrest warrant that had been issued;

Q.  whereas, pursuant to Rule 9(8) of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Legal Affairs shall not, under any circumstances, pronounce on the guilt or otherwise of the Member, nor on whether or not the opinions or acts attributed to the Member justify prosecution, even if, in considering the request, the Committee acquires detailed knowledge of the facts of the case;

R.  whereas in accordance with Rule 5(2) of the Rules of Procedure, parliamentary immunity is not a Member’s personal privilege but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and of its Members;

S.  whereas the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

T.  whereas the accusation clearly bears no relation to the position of Clara Ponsatí Obiols as Member of the European Parliament but to her former position as Regional Minister for Education of the Govern (Catalan regional government);

U.  whereas Clara Ponsatí Obiols is one of the individuals among a group of individuals who find themselves in a similar situation of being prosecuted and charged with the offences in question, with the only difference being that she currently enjoys immunity as a Member of the European Parliament; whereas it should therefore be borne in mind that Clara Ponsatí Obiols is not the only prosecuted person in the case in question;

V.  whereas the incriminated facts were committed in 2017 and the criminal proceedings in question were initiated against Clara Ponsatí Obiols in 2018; whereas on this basis, it cannot be claimed that the judicial proceedings were launched with the intention of hindering the future political activity of Clara Ponsatí Obiols as a Member of the European Parliament, when at that time her status as a Member of the European Parliament was still hypothetical and future;

W.  whereas in this case, Parliament has thus found no evidence of fumus persecutionis, i.e. factual elements which indicate that the intention underlying the legal proceeding may be to damage a Member’s political activity and thus the European Parliament;

1.  Decides to waive the immunity of Clara Ponsatí Obiols under Article 9, first paragraph, point (b), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its committee responsible immediately to the Spanish authorities and to Clara Ponsatí Obiols.

(1) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2008, Marra v De Gregorio and Clemente, C-200/07 and C-201/07, ECLI:EU:C:2008:579; judgment of the General Court of 19 March 2010, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-42/06, ECLI:EU:T:2010:102; judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 September 2011, Patriciello, C-163/10, ECLI: EU:C:2011:543; judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2013, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-346/11 and T-347/11, ECLI:EU:T:2013:23; judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 December 2019, Junqueras Vies, C-502/19, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1115. (2) Boletín Oficial del Estado, No 21, 24 January 2020, pp. 7441-7442. (3) OJ L 165 I, 2.7.2018, p. 1. (4) OJ L 278 I, 30.10.2019, p. 1.

European Parliament decision of 9 March 2021 on the request for waiver of the immunity of Valter Flego (2020/2054(IMM))

P9_TA(2021)0062 A9-0023/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity of Valter Flego, dated 19 February 2020 by the President of the Council of the Rijeka County Court in the Republic of Croatia in connection with criminal proceedings pending before the Rijeka County Criminal Court, and announced in plenary on 26 March 2020,

–  having regard to the waiver by Valter Flego of his right to be heard under Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

–  having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21 October 2008, 19 March 2010, 6 September 2011, 17 January 2013 and 19 December 2019(1),

–  having regard to Article 75 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia and to Articles 23 to 28 of the Standing Orders of the Croatian Parliament,

–  having regard to Rule 5(2), Rule 6(1) and Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0023/2021),

A.  whereas the presiding judge of Rijeka County Criminal Court submitted a request for waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Valter Flego in connection with pending proceedings brought against him for the criminal offence of abuse of office under Article 291(1) and (2) of the Criminal Code(2);

B.  whereas in his capacity as Mayor of the Town of Buzet, Croatia, from 1 April 2010 to 30 May 2013, he allegedly facilitated the illegal payments of salary supplements to himself as Mayor, to his Deputy Mayor, to the Director of the Office of the Mayor and to three other directors;

C.  whereas Valter Flego was elected to the European Parliament as result of the elections of May 2019;

D.  whereas the alleged offence does not concern opinions expressed or votes cast by Valter Flego in the performance of his duties within the meaning of Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

E.  whereas Article 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union provides that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;

F.  whereas pursuant to Article 75(2) and (3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia:

‘No representative shall be prosecuted, detained or punished for an opinion expressed or vote cast in the Croatian Parliament.

No representative shall be detained, nor shall criminal proceedings be instituted against him, without the consent of the Croatian Parliament’;

G.  whereas the alleged offence has no clear or direct bearing on the performance by Mr Flego of his duties as a Member of the European Parliament;

H.  whereas it is for Parliament alone to decide, in a given case, whether or not to waive immunity; whereas Parliament may reasonably take account of the position of the Member in order to decide whether or not to waive his immunity(3);

I.  whereas the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

J.  whereas the offences of which Valter Flego is accused took place prior to his election to the European Parliament;

K.  whereas, in this case, Parliament found no evidence of fumus persecutionis, i.e. factual elements which suggest that the intention underlying the legal proceedings in question is to undermine the Member’s political activity, including his activity as a Member of the European Parliament;

L.  whereas Parliament cannot assume the role of a court, and whereas, in a waiver of immunity procedure, a Member cannot be regarded as a defendant(4);

1.  Decides to waive the immunity of Valter Flego;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its committee responsible immediately to the Croatian authorities and to Valter Flego.

(1) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2008, Marra v De Gregorio and Clemente, C 200/07 and C-201/07, ECLI:EU:C:2008:579; judgment of the General Court of 19 March 2010, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-42/06, ECLI:EU:T:2010:102; judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 September 2011, Patriciello, C 163/10, ECLI: EU:C:2011:543; judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2013, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-346/11 and T-347/11, ECLI:EU:T:2013:23; judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 December 2019, Junqueras Vies, C-502/19, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1115. (2) Official Gazette of Croatia, 125/11, 144/12, 56/15, 61/15, 101/17, 118/2018 and 126/2019. (3) Judgment of the General Court of 15 October 2008, Mote v Parliament, T-345/05, EU:T:2008:440, point 28. (4) Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2019, Briois v Parliament, T-214/18, ECLI:EU:T:2019:266.

European Parliament decision of 9 March 2021 on the request for waiver of the immunity of Nuno Melo (2020/2050(IMM))

P9_TA(2021)0063 A9-0024/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity of João Nuno Lacerda Teixeira de Melo, submitted on 6 February 2020 by the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga, Juízo de Instrução Criminal de Guimarães, 2.º Juízo (Braga District Court, Guimarães Criminal Court, 2nd chamber), in the context of pending criminal proceedings following the submission of a private charge before that court (Proceedings 1039/17.2T9VNF), announced in plenary on 9 March 2020,

–  having heard Nuno Melo in accordance with Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union and to Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

–  having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21 October 2008, 19 March 2010, 6 September 2011, 17 January 2013 and 19 December 2019(1),

–  having regard to Article 157(2) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic,

–  having regard to Rule 5(2), Rule 6(1) and Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0024/2021),

A.  whereas the judge hearing these proceedings has requested the waiver of the immunity of Nuno Melo, MEP, with a view to his participation, in the aforementioned capacity as a victim/civil party, in all the steps deemed necessary to establish the truth in the context of the present case or in other cases already pending or which may be brought, in connection with the facts at issue here and involving the same parties;

B.  whereas the investigation does not concern opinions expressed or votes cast by Nuno Melo in the performance of his duties within the meaning of Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

C.  whereas Article 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union provides that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;

D.  whereas, according to Article 157(2) of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, authorisation of the Assembly is necessary for a Member to be heard as a witness or as a defendant, and whereas the same paragraph states, however, that such authorisation shall be granted ex officio in the event of serious and consistent evidence that a criminal offence has been perpetrated intentionally and which is punishable by a term of imprisonment of more than three years;

E.  whereas Nuno Melo initiated the present case by bringing criminal proceedings against João Quadros for acts likely prima facie to constitute the commission of several offences of defamation and insult provided for and punished by Article 180(1), Article 181(1) and Article 183(1)(a) and (2) of the Portuguese Criminal Code;

F.  whereas, under Article 9(8) of the Rules of Procedure, the Committee on Legal Affairs shall not, under any circumstances, decide on the guilt or innocence of the Member of Parliament or whether or not to prosecute him or her in respect of the opinions or acts attributed to that person, even where in the considering the request the Committee on Legal Affairs acquires an in-depth knowledge of the case;

G.  whereas, in accordance with Article 5(2) of its Rules of Procedure, parliamentary immunity is not a personal privilege of the Member but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and of its Members;

H.  whereas the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

I.  whereas, in this case, Parliament found no evidence of fumus persecutionis, i.e. factual elements which suggest that the intention underlying the legal proceedings in question is to undermine the Member’s political activity, including his activity as a Member of the European Parliament;

1.  Decides to waive the immunity of Nuno Melo;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its committee responsible immediately to the Portuguese authorities and to Nuno Melo.

(1) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 October 2008, Marra v De Gregorio and Clemente, C-200/07 and C-201/07, ECLI:EU:C:2008:579; judgment of the General Court of 19 March 2010, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-42/06, ECLI:EU:T:2010:102; judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 September 2011, Patriciello, C-163/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:543; judgment of the General Court of 17 January 2013, Gollnisch v Parliament, T-346/11 and T-347/11, ECLI:EU:T:2013:23; judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 December 2019, Junqueras Vies, C-502/19, ECLI:EU:C:2019:1115.

European Parliament decision to raise no objections to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/95 of 28 January 2021 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 on temporary exceptional measures derogating from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council to address the market disturbance in the fruit and vegetables and wine sectors caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and measures linked to it (C(2021)00368 – 2021/2531(DEA))

P9_TA(2021)0064 B9-0157/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/95(1),

–  having regard to the letter from the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development to the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs of 24 February 2021,

–  having regard to Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2), and in particular Article 219(1) and Article 228 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for a decision of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,

–  having regard to the fact that no objections have been raised within the period laid down in the third and fourth indents of Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure, which expired on 9 March 2021,

A.  whereas, in light of the exceptionally severe market disturbance and of the accumulation of difficult circumstances inter alia in the wine sector, which has its origin in the imposition, in October 2019, by the United States of tariffs on imports of wines from the Union and which continues now with the fall-out from the on-going restrictive measures due to the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, exceptional difficulties have been encountered by operators in all Member States with the planning, implementation and execution of operations under support programmes;

B.  whereas, in view of the unprecedented nature of those combined circumstances, the Commission adopted, on 30 April 2020, Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592(3) providing for flexibilities and allowing derogations from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 to address the market disturbance in the fruit and vegetables and wine sectors caused by the COVID-19 pandemic;

C.  whereas, despite the usefulness of those measures, the wine sector has not managed to regain its balance between supply and demand and is not expected to regain it in the short to medium term due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic;

D.  whereas, given that the COVID-19 pandemic is expected to continue during a considerable part of the financial year 2021, the Commission proposed in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/95 to extend the application of the measures laid down in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 until 15 October 2021;

E.  whereas the swift implementation of those continued flexibilities and derogations are essential to their effectiveness and efficacy in addressing difficulties in the running of support programmes, preventing further economic losses and addressing the market situation and disturbances in the wine sector;

1.  Declares that it has no objections to Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/95;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 31, 29.1.2021, p. 198. (2) Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671). (3) Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 of 30 April 2020 on temporary exceptional measures derogating from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council to address the market disturbance in the fruit and vegetables and wine sectors caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and measures linked to it (OJ L 140, 4.5.2020, p. 6).

European Parliament decision to raise no objections to the Commission delegated regulation of 1 February 2021 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/1366 as regards the basis for allocating the financial contribution in the apiculture sector (C(2021)00429 – 2021/2535(DEA))

P9_TA(2021)0065 B9-0158/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission delegated regulation (C(2021)00429),

–  having regard to the Commission’s letter of 12 February 2021 asking Parliament to declare that it will raise no objections to the delegated regulation,

–  having regard to the letter from the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development to the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs of 24 February 2021,

–  having regard to Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(1), and in particular Article 56(1) and Article 227 thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for a decision of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,

–  having regard to the fact that no objections have been raised within the period laid down in the third and fourth indents of Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure, which expired on 9 March 2021,

A.  whereas Regulation (EU) 2020/2220 of the European Parliament and of the Council(2) (the ‘Transitional Regulation’), which amended Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 by extending the Union contributions to the apiculture programmes for the years 2021 and 2022, has only entered into force on 29 December 2020;

B.  whereas, for the period 2021-2027, the Commission had proposed to increase the Union contribution to the apiculture programmes to EUR 60 000 000 per year, with the Member States’ allocations set out in Annex VIII to the Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing rules on support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the common agricultural policy (CAP Strategic Plans) and financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council(3); the basis for the allocation of the Union contribution to Member States in that Commission proposal was the allocation of Union funds for the 2017-2019 apiculture programmes, which in turn was made on the basis of the number of beehives communicated in 2013 by the Member States in their respective 2014-2016 apiculture programmes;

C.  whereas in order to ensure consistency with the above-mentioned Commission proposal COM(2018)0392, and in order to ensure coherence between the allocations for apiculture programmes for the years 2021 and 2022 and from 2023 onwards, and to provide certainty to Member States and facilitate the approval of apiculture programmes it is essential that this delegated regulation is published as soon as possible;

1.  Declares that it has no objections to the delegated regulation;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission.

(1) Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671). (2) Regulation (EU) 2020/2220 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 December 2020 laying down certain transitional provisions for support from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) in the years 2021 and 2022 and amending Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013, (EU) No 1306/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013 as regards resources and application in the years 2021 and 2022 and Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 as regards resources and the distribution of such support in respect of the years 2021 and 2022 (OJ L 437, 28.12.2020, p. 1). (3) COM(2018)0392.

European Parliament decision to raise no objections to the Commission delegated regulation of 11 February 2021 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1222/2014 supplementing Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards for the specification of the methodology for the identification of global systemically important institutions and for the definition of subcategories of global systemically important institutions (C(2021)0772 – 2021/2561(DEA))

P9_TA(2021)0066 B9-0168/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission delegated regulation (C(2021)0772),

–  having regard to the Commission’s letter of 18 February 2021 asking Parliament to declare that it will raise no objections to the delegated regulation,

–  having regard to the letter from the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs to the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs of 4 March 2021,

–  having regard to Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms, amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC(1) (CRD), and in particular Articles 131(18) and 149 thereof,

–  having regard to the draft set of regulatory technical standards submitted by the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) (EBA) on 4 November 2020 pursuant to Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/78/EC(2),

–  having regard to Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for a decision of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs,

–  having regard to the fact that no objections have been raised within the period laid down in the third and fourth indents of Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure, which expired on 9 March 2021,

A.  whereas the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) published a revised methodology for assessing global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) in July 2018; whereas those changes to the methodology for assessing G-SIBs should be reflected in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1222/2014(3); whereas Directive (EU) 2019/878 of the European Parliament and of the Council(4) amended Article 131 CRD, and those changes should also be reflected in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1222/2014;

B.  whereas the amendments to CRD became applicable on 29 December 2020 but do not specify a deadline for the submission of the amending delegated act; whereas the EBA provided draft amending regulatory technical standards to the Commission on 4 November 2020; whereas it is the Commission’s goal to apply the additional EU methodology specified in the draft amending regulatory technical standards already for the 2021 global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs, the equivalent of GSIBs in the Union) annual identification exercise, which will be launched by the EBA in April 2021 (based on end-2020 data), and will be completed in November 2021;

C.  whereas the delegated regulation should enter into force as a matter of urgency to ensure the Commission’s goal of allowing the application of the additional EU methodology in the first G-SII exercise under the amended CRD, which is the 2021 exercise; whereas in order to provide legal certainty for the exercise starting in April 2021, the amending delegated regulation would have to enter into force by that date;

1.  Declares that it has no objections to the delegated regulation;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 338. (2) OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 12. (3) Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1222/2014 of 8 October 2014 supplementing Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards for the specification of the methodology for the identification of global systemically important institutions and for the definition of subcategories of global systemically important institutions (OJ L 330, 15.11.2014, p. 27). (4) Directive (EU) 2019/878 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 amending Directive 2013/36/EU as regards exempted entities, financial holding companies, mixed financial holding companies, remuneration, supervisory measures and powers and capital conservation measures (OJ L 150, 7.6.2019, p. 253).

European Parliament decision to raise no objections to the Commission delegated regulation of 11 February 2021 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/2361 as regards the arrangements for the payment of contributions to the administrative expenditures of the Single Resolution Board (C(2021)0766 – 2021/2562(DEA))

P9_TA(2021)0067 B9-0169/2021

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission delegated regulation (C(2021)0766),

–  having regard to the Commission’s letter of 16 February 2021 asking Parliament to declare that it will raise no objections to the delegated regulation,

–  having regard to the letter from the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs to the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs of 4 March 2021,

–  having regard to Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 July 2014 establishing uniform rules and a uniform procedure for the resolution of credit institutions and certain investment firms in the framework of a Single Resolution Mechanism and a Single Resolution Fund and amending Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010(1) (SRMR), and in particular Articles 65(5) and 93(6) thereof,

–  having regard to Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the recommendation for a decision of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs,

–  having regard to the fact that no objections have been raised within the period laid down in the third and fourth indents of Rule 111(6) of its Rules of Procedure, which expired on 9 March 2021,

A.  whereas the Single Resolution Board (‘the Board’) relies on the data on total assets and total risk exposures that the European Central Bank (ECB) collects from the entities that are subject to the Single Resolution Mechanism to calculate the supervisory fees referred to in Regulation (EU) No 1163/2014 of the European Central Bank(2) when calculating the individual annual contributions referred to in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/2361(3); whereas Regulation (EU) No 1163/2014 has been amended by Regulation (EU) 2019/2155 of the European Central Bank(4), thereby changing the levying approach from one that provides for advance payment of the annual supervisory fees to the ECB to one that provides for the levying of supervisory fees only after the end of the relevant fee period;

B.  whereas those changes by the ECB require amendments to the deadlines for the transmission of the data and for the issuance of the contribution notices under Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/2361 in order to maintain coherence between the Board’s system of levying contributions in advance and the ECB’s new regime, and to enable the Board to continue calculating and raising in advance the annual contributions;

C.  whereas the delegated regulation should enter into force as a matter of urgency since the Board needs to apply the transitional arrangements in order to raise the contributions for its administrative expenditures for the financial year 2021 as soon as possible after the beginning of the year;

1.  Declares that it has no objections to the delegated regulation;

2.  Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 225, 30.7.2014, p. 1. (2) Regulation (EU) No 1163/2014 of the European Central Bank of 22 October 2014 on supervisory fees (ECB/2014/41) (OJ L 311, 31.10.2014, p. 23). (3) Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/2361 of 14 September 2017 on the final system of contributions to the administrative expenditures of the Single Resolution Board (OJ L 337, 19.12.2017, p. 6). (4) Regulation (EU) 2019/2155 of the European Central Bank of 5 December 2019 amending Regulation (EU) No 1163/2014 on supervisory fees (ECB/2019/37) (OJ L 327, 17.12.2019, p. 70).

European Parliament legislative resolution of 9 March 2021 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the InvestEU Programme (COM(2020)0403 – C9-0158/2020 – 2020/0108(COD))

P9_TA(2021)0068 A9-0203/2020

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2020)0403),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 173 and the third paragraph of Article 175 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9‑0158/2020),

–  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 July 2020(1),

–  after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

–  having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committees responsible under Rule 74(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 17 December 2020 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

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

–  having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the Committee on Transport and Tourism,

–  having regard to the positions in the form of amendments of the Committee on Culture and Education and of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A9-0203/2020),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(2);

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

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 9 March 2021 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2021/… of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the InvestEU Programme and amending Regulation (EU) 2015/1017

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2021/523.)

(1) OJ C 364, 28.10.2020, p. 139. (2) This position replaces the amendments adopted on 13 November 2020 (Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0306).

European Parliament legislative resolution of 9 March 2021 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of a Programme for the Union's action in the field of health – for the period 2021-2027 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 282/2014 (“EU4Health Programme”) (COM(2020)0405 – C9-0152/2020 – 2020/0102(COD))

P9_TA(2021)0069 A9-0196/2020

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2020)0405),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 168(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9‑0152/2020),

–  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 18 September 2020(1),

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 14 October 2020(2),

–  having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 74(4) of its Rules of Procedure and the undertaking given by the Council representative by letter of 18 December 2020 to approve Parliament’s position, in accordance with Article 294(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

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

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee on Budgets,

–  having regard to the position in the form of amendments of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A9-0196/2020),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out(3);

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

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 9 March 2021 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EU) 2021/… of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Programme for the Union's action in the field of health (‘EU4Health Programme’) for the period 2021-2027, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 282/2014

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EU) 2021/522.)

(1) OJ C 429, 11.12.2020, p. 251. (2) OJ C 440, 18.12.2020, p. 131. (3) This position replaces the amendments adopted on 13 November 2020 (Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0304).