Choisissez la langue de votre document :
- bg - български
- es - español
- cs - čeština
- da - dansk
- de - Deutsch
- et - eesti keel
- el - ελληνικά
- en - English
- fr - français
- ga - Gaeilge
- hr - hrvatski
- it - italiano
- lv - latviešu valoda
- lt - lietuvių kalba
- hu - magyar
- mt - Malti
- nl - Nederlands
- pl - polski
- pt - português
- ro - română
- sk - slovenčina
- sl - slovenščina
- fi - suomi
- sv - svenska
|
 Fisheries control ***I |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Equivalence of forest reproductive material produced in the UK ***I |
| |||||||
| ||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2020)0852), – having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9-0430/2020), – 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 27 January 2021(1), – having regard to Rules 59 and 163 of its Rules of Procedure, 1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out; 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 11 March 2021 with a view to the adoption of Decision (EU) 2021/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Decision 2008/971/EC as regards the equivalence of forest reproductive material produced in the United Kingdom
(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision (EU) 2021/536.)
| ||||||||
| Equivalence of field inspections and equivalence of checks on practices for the maintenance of varieties of agricultural plant species carried out in the UK ***I |
| |||||||
| ||||||||
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading) The European Parliament, – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2020)0853), – having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 43(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C9-0431/2020), – 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 27 January 2021(1), – having regard to Rules 59 and 163 of its Rules of Procedure, 1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out; 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 11 March 2021 with a view to the adoption of Decision (EU) 2021/… of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Decisions 2003/17/EC and 2005/834/EC as regards the equivalence of field inspections and the equivalence of checks on practices for the maintenance of varieties of agricultural plant species carried out in the United Kingdom
(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision (EU) 2021/537.)
| ||||||||
| Active substances, including dimoxystrobin |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52 of 22 January 2021 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 as regards the extension of the approval periods of the active substances benfluralin, dimoxystrobin, fluazinam, flutolanil, mecoprop-P, mepiquat, metiram, oxamyl and pyraclostrobin(1), – having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC(2), and in particular the first paragraph of Article 17 and Article 21 thereof, – having regard to the opinion delivered on 10 December 2020 by the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed, – having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/408 of 11 March 2015 on implementing Article 80(7) of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and establishing a list of candidates for substitution(3), – having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(4), – having regard to its resolution of 13 September 2018 on the implementation of the Plant Protection Products Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009(5), – having regard to Rule 112(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, A. whereas dimoxystrobin was included in Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC(6) on 1 October 2006 by Commission Directive 2006/75/EC(7) and has been deemed to be approved under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009; B. whereas a procedure to renew the approval of dimoxystrobin under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012(8) has been ongoing since 2013; C. whereas the approval period of the active substance dimoxystrobin, which was originally due to end on 30 September 2016, was already extended by 16 months by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1136/2013(9), and subsequently by further periods of one year by Commission Implementing Regulations (EU) 2018/84(10), (EU) 2018/1796(11) and (EU) 2019/2094(12), and has now again been extended by one year by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52, which extends the approval period to 31 January 2022; D. whereas the Commission has failed in Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52 to explain the reasons for the extensions other than by stating: ‘Due to the fact that the assessment of those substances has been delayed for reasons beyond the control of the applicants, the approvals of those active substances are likely to expire before a decision has been taken on their renewal’; E. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 aims to ensure a high level of protection of both human and animal health and the environment, and at the same time to safeguard the competitiveness of Union agriculture; whereas particular attention should be paid to the protection of vulnerable groups of the population, including pregnant women, infants and children; F. whereas the precautionary principle should apply, and Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 provides that substances should only be included in plant protection products where it has been demonstrated that they present a clear benefit for plant production and that they are not expected to have any harmful effect on human or animal health or any unacceptable effects on the environment; G. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 provides that in the interest of safety the approval period for active substances should be limited in time; whereas the approval period should be proportionate to the possible risks inherent in the use of such substances, but, in the case of the active substances that are subject to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52, it is clear that no such proportionality exists; H. whereas the Commission and Member States have the possibility and responsibility to act in accordance with the precautionary principle when the risk of harmful effects on health has been identified but scientific uncertainty persists, by adopting provisional risk management measures that are necessary to ensure a high level of protection of human health; I. whereas, more specifically, Article 21 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 provides that the Commission may review the approval of an active substance at any time, especially where, in the light of new scientific and technical knowledge, it considers that there are indications that the substance no longer satisfies the approval criteria provided for in Article 4 of that Regulation, and whereas this review may lead to the withdrawal or amendment of the approval of the substance; Endocrine-disrupting properties J. whereas, in 2015, dimoxystrobin was placed on the ‘list of candidates for substitution’ by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/408 because the Acute Reference Dose (ARfD) for that active substance is significantly lower than that of the majority of the approved active substances within its group of substances, and because it is to be considered as having endocrine-disrupting properties that may cause adverse effects in humans; K. whereas, according to point 3.6.5 of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, an active substance cannot be approved when it is considered to have endocrine-disrupting properties that may cause adverse effects in humans, unless the exposure of humans to that active substance in a plant protection product, under realistic proposed conditions of use, is negligible, that is, the product is used in closed systems or in other conditions excluding contact with humans and where residues of the active substance concerned on food and feed do not exceed the default value set in accordance with point (b) of Article 18(1) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council(13); L. whereas it is unacceptable that a substance which is known to meet the cut-off criteria for active substances that are mutagenic, carcinogenic and/or toxic for reproduction, or that have endocrine-disrupting properties, which are established to protect human health and the environment, continues to be allowed for use in the Union, thereby putting human health and the environment at risk; M. whereas applicants can take advantage of the automatic system built into Commission working methods, which immediately extends the approval periods of active substances if the risk reassessment has not been finalised, by deliberately prolonging the reassessment process by providing incomplete data and asking for more derogations and special conditions, which leads to unacceptable risks for human health and the environment since, during this time, exposure to the hazardous substance continues; N. whereas in its resolution of 13 September 2018 on the implementation of the Plant Products Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, Parliament called on the Commission and Member States ‘to ensure that the procedural extension of the approval period for the duration of the procedure, pursuant to Article 17 of the Regulation, will not be used for active substances that are mutagenic, carcinogenic, toxic for reproduction and therefore in category 1A or 1B, or active substances that have endocrine disrupting characteristics and are damaging to humans or animals, as is currently the case for substances such as flumioxazine, thiacloprid, chlorotoluron and dimoxystrobin’; O. whereas Parliament has already objected to the previous extension of the approval period of dimoxystrobin in its resolution of 18 December 2019(14), and the Commission has failed to give a convincing response to that resolution and has also failed to properly demonstrate that another extension would not exceed its implementing powers; P. whereas following the previous extension in 2019 of the approval periods of 10 active substances, including dimoxystrobin, under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2094, the approval of only one of those substances has not been renewed, while under Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52, the approval periods of the remaining nine substances have been extended again, many of them for the third or fourth time and two of them for as much as the sixth time; 1. Considers that Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52 exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009; 2. Considers that Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52 does not respect the precautionary principle; 3. Considers that the decision to extend the approval period of dimoxystrobin is not in line with the safety criteria laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, and is based neither on evidence that that substance can be used safely, nor on a proven urgent need for that substance in food production in the Union; 4. Calls on the Commission to repeal Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/52 and to submit a new draft to the committee, which takes into account the scientific evidence on the harmful properties of all the substances concerned, especially those of dimoxystrobin; 5. Calls on the Commission to present a proposal for non-renewal of dimoxystrobin in the next meeting of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed; 6. Calls on the Commission to communicate to Parliament the specific reasons why the assessment of the substances has been delayed for reasons beyond the control of the applicants, which specific endpoints are still under assessment, and why that assessment requires so much time to be conducted; 7. Reiterates its call on the Commission to present draft implementing regulations to extend the approval periods only of substances for which the current state of science is not expected to lead to a Commission proposal for non-renewal of the approval of the active substance concerned; 8. Reiterates its call on the Commission to withdraw the approvals for substances, if proof or reasonable doubts exist that they will not meet the safety criteria laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009; 9. Reiterates its call on the Member States to ensure the proper and timely reassessment of the approvals of the active substances for which they are the reporting Member States, and to ensure that the current delays are solved effectively as soon as possible; 10. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Genetically modified cotton GHB614 × T304-40 × GHB119 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified cotton GHB614 × T304-40 × GHB119 pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (D070621/02), – having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed(1), and in particular Articles 7(3) and 19(3) thereof, – having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2013 on applications for authorisation of genetically modified food and feed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Commission Regulations (EC) No 641/2004 and (EC) No 1981/2006(2), – having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on 11 January 2021, at which no opinion was delivered, – having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(3), – having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 21 June 2018, and published on 25 July 2018(4), – having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms (‘GMOs’)(5), – having regard to Rule 112(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, A. whereas, on 30 September 2014, Bayer CropScience AG (‘the applicant’) submitted an application for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified cotton GHB614 × T304-40 × GHB119 (‘the GM cotton’) in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; whereas the application also covered the placing on the market of products containing or consisting of the GM cotton for uses other than food and feed, with the exception of cultivation; B. whereas, on 21 June 2018, EFSA adopted a favourable opinion, which was published on 25 July 2018; C. whereas the GM cotton is derived from crossing three genetically modified (‘GM’) cotton events, and confers tolerance to herbicides containing glufosinate and glyphosate (the ‘complementary herbicides’) as well as producing two insecticidal proteins (‘Bt’ or ‘Cry’ toxins): Cry1Ab and Cry2Ae, which are toxic to certain lepidopteran larvae feeding on cotton(6); D. whereas while the human consumption of cottonseed oil may be relatively limited in Europe, it can be found in a wide variety of food products, including dressings, mayonnaise, fine bakery wares, chocolate spreads and chips; whereas cotton is fed to animals mainly in the form of cottonseed cake/meal or as full fat cottonseeds(7); whereas cotton is also consumed in the form of cotton flour by humans; E. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that GM food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision; whereas such legitimate factors should include the Union’s obligations under the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (‘SDGs’), the Paris Climate Agreement and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (‘UN CBD’); F. whereas Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2013 requires an assessment of whether the expected agricultural practices influence the outcome of the studied endpoints; whereas, according to that Implementing Regulation, this is especially relevant for herbicide resistant plants; whereas, furthermore, the different sites selected for the field trials shall reflect the different meteorological and agronomic conditions under which the crop is to be grown; Lack of data on gene expression and plant composition G. whereas, field trials for the compositional and agronomic assessment of the GM cotton were conducted in the United States at only eight sites, but not in other relevant cotton producing areas; whereas only data from one year, 2012, were used to produce data on the relevant meteorological conditions under which the plants may be grown; H. whereas, glufosinate and glyphosate were not used in the high doses that may be expected in the context of increasing weed resistance; I. whereas EFSA failed to request further studies, e.g. field trials lasting for more than one season and from sites in other cotton producing regions; whereas, furthermore, no data were generated representing more extreme environmental conditions, such as those caused by climate change, even though it has been shown that environmental factors can impact the expression of Bt toxins(8); Lack of assessment of the complementary herbicides J. whereas a number of studies show that herbicide-tolerant GM crops result in a higher use of complementary herbicides, in large part because of the emergence of herbicide-tolerant weeds(9); whereas, as a consequence, it has to be expected that the GM cotton will be exposed to both higher and repeated doses of glufosinate and glyphosate, and that therefore a higher quantity of residues may be present in the harvest; K. whereas questions concerning the carcinogenicity of glyphosate remain; whereas EFSA concluded in November 2015 that glyphosate was unlikely to be carcinogenic and the European Chemicals Agency concluded in March 2017 that no classification was warranted; whereas, on the contrary, in 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the specialised cancer agency of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen for humans; L. whereas, according to EFSA, toxicological data allowing a consumer risk assessment to be performed for several break-down products of glyphosate relevant for GM glyphosate-tolerant crops are missing(10); M. whereas glufosinate is classified as toxic to reproduction 1B and therefore meets the ‘cut-off criteria’ set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council(11); whereas the approval of glufosinate for use in the Union expired on 31 July 2018(12); whereas the GM cotton has been made doubly tolerant to glufosinate, allowing even higher doses to be used on the plants; N. whereas studies show that glyphosate and glufosinate can severely impact the microbiome(13), and consequently the long term toxicity (mixed toxicity) of whole food and feed of the Bt toxins on the intestinal gut from spraying with glyphosate and glufosinate should first be assessed before any conclusion can be reached on health impacts and food safety; O. whereas assessment of herbicide residues and their break-down products found on GM plants is considered outside the remit of the EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (EFSA GMO Panel) and is therefore not undertaken as part of the authorisation process for GMOs; whereas this is problematic since the way in which complementary herbicides are broken down by the GM plant concerned, and the composition and thus toxicity of the break-down products (‘metabolites’), can be impacted by the genetic modification itself(14); Outstanding questions concerning Bt toxins P. whereas Cry1Ab and Cry2Ae proteins produced in Escherichia coli (E. coli) and B. thuringiensis respectively were used to conduct the safety studies, rather than proteins produced by the GM plant itself(15), meaning that the assessment of toxic effects is based on the assumed equivalence of Bt toxins produced artificially in bacteria with the plant produced Bt toxins; whereas, however, in order to adequately take into account synergistic effects, assessments should not solely be based on tests with transgenic Bt toxins produced in microbial systems; Q. whereas, furthermore, little significance can be attributed to toxicological tests conducted with proteins in isolation, due to the fact that Bt toxins in GM crops, such as maize, cotton and soybeans, are inherently more toxic than isolated Bt toxins; whereas this is because protease inhibitors (PI), present in the plant tissue, can increase the toxicity of the Bt toxins by delaying their degradation; whereas this phenomena has been demonstrated in a number of scientific studies, including one conducted for Monsanto 30 years ago which showed that even the presence of extremely low levels of PI enhanced the toxicity of Bt toxins up to 20-fold(16); R. whereas those effects have never been taken into account in EFSA risk assessments, even though they are relevant for all Bt plants approved for import or cultivation in the Union; whereas risks arising from this enhanced toxicity due to the interaction between PI and Bt toxins, to humans and animals consuming food and feed containing Bt toxins cannot be ruled out; S. whereas a number of studies show that side effects have been observed that may affect the immune system following exposure to Bt toxins and that some Bt toxins may have adjuvant properties(17), meaning that they can increase the allergenicity of other proteins with which they come into contact; T. whereas assessment of the potential interaction of herbicide residues and their metabolites with Bt toxins is considered outside the remit of the EFSA GMO Panel and is therefore not undertaken as part of the risk assessment; whereas this is problematic since residues from spraying with glyphosate and glufosinate are known to disturb the microbiome which, for example, may enhance immune reactions in combination with Bt toxins(18); Bt crops: effects on non-target organisms and increased resistance U. whereas, unlike the use of insecticides, where exposure is at the time of spraying and for a limited time afterwards, the use of Bt GM crops leads to continuous exposure of the target and non-target organisms to Bt toxins; V. whereas the assumption that Bt toxins exhibit a single target-specific mode-of-action can no longer be considered correct and effects on non-target organisms cannot be excluded(19); whereas an increasing number of non-target organisms are reported to be affected in many ways; whereas 39 peer-reviewed publications that report significant adverse effects of Bt toxins on many ‘out-of-range’ species are mentioned in a recent overview(20); W. whereas a range of non-target organisms in the Union could be exposed to Bt toxins via spillage, waste and manure resulting from the import of Bt crops; whereas no effects on non-target organisms were evaluated in the risk assessment; X. whereas the risk assessment did not consider the development of resistance in the target pests to Bt toxins, possibly resulting in the use of less environmentally safe pesticides or increased doses and the number of applications to the GM crop in the country of cultivation; whereas, the United States Environmental Protection Agency is planning to phase out many Bt corn hybrids, as well as some Bt cotton varieties, in the next three to five years, due to the growth in insect resistance to such crops(21); Y. whereas, while it has been claimed that the use of Bt crops leads to a decrease in the use of insecticides, a recently published United States study(22), finds that ‘several analyses on the influence of Bt crops on pesticide-use patterns do not seem to have considered seed treatments and so may have overstated reductions in insecticide use (especially ‘area treated’) associated with Bt crops’; Z. whereas the Union is party to the UN CBD, which makes it clear that both exporting and importing countries have international responsibilities regarding biological diversity; Member State competent authority comments AA. whereas Member States submitted many critical comments to EFSA during the three-month consultation period(23); whereas those critical comments include that data and data analyses provided on phenotypic evaluation, composition and toxicity is insufficient, that the compositional analysis did not take into account residues nor metabolites of the complementary herbicides, and that the applicant’s proposal for an environmental monitoring plan does not meet the objectives defined in Annex VII of Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council(24) and that it does not relate the monitoring activities to relevant protection goals; whereas one Member State competent authority rejected the proposal to place the GM cotton on the market on the basis that the previous evaluations for the three single events were insufficient to ensure a high protection of human health; Upholding the Union’s international obligations AB. whereas a 2017 report by the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the right to food found that, particularly in developing countries, hazardous pesticides have catastrophic impacts on health(25); whereas UN SDG Target 3.9 aims by 2030 to substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination(26); whereas authorising the import of the GM cotton would increase demand for this crop treated with a herbicide that is toxic to reproduction and that is no longer authorised for use in the Union, thereby increasing the exposure of workers in third countries; whereas the risk of increased worker exposure is of particular concern in relation to herbicide-tolerant GM crops, given the higher volumes of herbicides used; Undemocratic decision-making AC. whereas the vote on 11 January 2021 of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 delivered no opinion, meaning that the authorisation was not supported by a qualified majority of Member States; whereas 13 Member States (representing 35,52 % of the Union population) voted against authorisation, whilst only 10 Member States (representing 27,49 %) voted in favour; whereas 4 Member States (representing 37 %) abstained; AD. whereas the Commission recognises that the fact that GMO authorisation decisions continue to be adopted by the Commission without a qualified majority of Member States in favour, which is very much the exception for product authorisations as a whole but has become the norm for decision-making on GM food and feed authorisations, is problematic; AE. whereas, in its eighth term, the European Parliament adopted a total of 36 resolutions objecting to the placing on the market of GMOs for food and feed (33 resolutions) and to the cultivation of GMOs in the Union (three resolutions); whereas, in its ninth term, the European Parliament has already adopted 16 objections to placing GMOs on the market; whereas there was not a qualified majority of Member States in favour of authorising any of those GMOs; whereas the reasons for Member States not supporting authorisations include lack of respect for the precautionary principle in the authorisation process and scientific concerns relating to the risk assessment; AF. whereas despite its own acknowledgement of the democratic shortcomings, the lack of support from Member States and the objections of Parliament, the Commission continues to authorise GMOs; AG. whereas no change of law is required for the Commission to be able not to authorise GMOs when there is no qualified majority of Member States in favour in the Appeal Committee(27); 1. Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; 2. Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law, in that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council(28), to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, and environmental and consumer interests, in relation to GM food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market; 3. Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision; 4. Welcomes the fact that the Commission finally recognised, in a letter of 11 September 2020 to Members, the need to take sustainability into account when it comes to authorisation decisions on GMOs(29); expresses its deep disappointment, however, that, since then the Commission has continued to authorise GMOs for import into the Union, despite ongoing objections by Parliament and a majority of Member States voting against; 5. Calls on the Commission to move forward with the utmost urgency concerning the development of sustainability criteria, with full involvement of Parliament; calls on the Commission to provide information on how this process will be undertaken and in what timeframe; 6. Reiterates its call on the Commission not to authorise herbicide-tolerant GM crops until the health risks associated with the residues have been comprehensively investigated on a case-by-case basis, which requires a full assessment of the residues from spraying such GM crops with complementary herbicides, an assessment of the herbicide break-down products and any combinatorial effects, including with the GM plant itself; 7. Reiterates its call on the Commission not to authorise the import for food or feed uses of any GM plant which has been made tolerant to a herbicide-active substance that is not authorised for use in the Union; 8. Calls on EFSA to finally accept the substantial differences between native Bt toxins and those expressed by synthetic transgenes in GM crop plants, and to widen its risk assessment in order to fully take into account all interactions and combinatorial effects between Bt toxins, GM plants and their constituents, residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides, the environment as well as impacts on health and food safety; 9. Calls on EFSA to no longer accept toxicity studies based on isolated proteins which are likely to be different in structure and biological effects compared to those produced by the plant itself, and to require that all tests are carried out with tissue from the GM plant; 10. Calls on EFSA to make sure that data from field trials or greenhouses cover a sufficiently broad range of agronomic and environmental conditions to assess the impact of all stress factors which have to be expected during cultivation on gene expression and plant composition; 11. Calls on EFSA to make sure that the data from field trials or greenhouses cover a sufficiently broad range of different varieties to assess the impact of various genetic backgrounds on gene expression and plant composition; 12. Calls on EFSA to request data on the impact of the consumption of food and feed derived from GM plants on the intestinal microbiome; 13. Urges the Commission, again, to take into account the Union’s obligations under international agreements, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the UN CBD and the UN SDGs; 14. Highlights that the amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 17 December 2020 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011(30), which were adopted in Parliament as a basis for negotiations with the Council, state that the Commission shall not authorise GMOs when there is not a qualified majority of Member States in favour; insists that the Commission respect this position and calls on the Council to proceed with its work and adopt a general approach on this file as a matter of urgency; 15. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Genetically modified maize MZIR098 (SYN-ØØØ98-3) |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the draft Commission implementing decision authorising the placing on the market of products containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified maize MZIR098 (SYN-ØØØ98-3), pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council (D070620/02), – having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed(1), and in particular Articles 7(3) and 19(3) thereof, – having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2013 of 3 April 2013 on applications for authorisation of genetically modified food and feed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Commission Regulations (EC) No 641/2004 and (EC) No 1981/2006(2), – having regard to the vote of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on 11 January 2021, at which no opinion was delivered, – having regard to Articles 11 and 13 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers(3), – having regard to the opinion adopted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 28 May 2020, and published on 26 June 2020(4), – having regard to its previous resolutions objecting to the authorisation of genetically modified organisms (‘GMOs’)(5), – having regard to Rule 112(2) and (3) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, A. whereas, on 25 April 2017, Syngenta Crop Protection NV/SA (‘the applicant’) submitted an application for the placing on the market of foods, food ingredients and feed containing, consisting of or produced from genetically modified maize MZIR098 (‘the GM maize’) in accordance with Articles 5 and 17 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; whereas the application also covered the placing on the market of products containing or consisting of the GM maize for uses other than food and feed, with the exception of cultivation; B. whereas, on 28 May 2020, EFSA adopted a favourable opinion, which was published on 26 June 2020; C. whereas the GM maize has been modified to confer tolerance to herbicides containing glufosinate (the ‘complementary herbicide’) as well as producing two insecticidal proteins (‘Bt’ or ‘Cry’ toxins): eCry3.1Ab and mCry3A, which are toxic to certain coleopteran larvae feeding on maize(6); D. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 states that genetically modified (‘GM’) food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision; E. whereas Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2013 requires an assessment of whether the expected agricultural practices influence the outcome of the studied endpoints; whereas, according to that Implementing Regulation, this is especially relevant for herbicide resistant plants; whereas, furthermore, the different sites selected for the field trials shall reflect the different meteorological and agronomic conditions under which the crop is to be grown; Lack of data on gene expression and plant composition F. whereas, field trials for the compositional and agronomic assessment of the GM maize were conducted in the United States at only eight sites, but not in other relevant maize producing areas such as Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay or Uruguay; whereas only data from one year, 2013, were used to produce data on the relevant meteorological conditions under which the plants may be grown; whereas glufosinate was not used as a complementary herbicide in the high doses that should be expected in the context of increasing weed resistance; G. whereas EFSA failed to request further studies, e.g. field trials lasting for more than one season and in other maize producing regions; whereas, furthermore, no data were generated representing more extreme environmental conditions, such as those caused by climate change even though it has been shown that environmental factors can impact Bt toxin expression(7); Lack of analysis of glufosinate residues H. whereas glufosinate is classified as toxic to reproduction 1B and thus meets the ‘cut-off criteria’ set out in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council(8); whereas the approval of glufosinate for use in the Union expired on 31 July 2018(9); I. whereas studies show that glufosinate can severely impact the microbiome(10), and consequently the long term toxicity (mixed toxicity) of whole food and feed of the Bt toxins on the intestinal gut from spraying with glufosinate should first be assessed before any conclusion can be taken on health impacts and food safety; J. whereas assessment of herbicide residues, and herbicide break-down products, found on GM plants, along with their interaction with Bt toxins, is considered outside the remit of the EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms(‘EFSA GMO Panel`) and is therefore not undertaken as part of the authorisation process for GMOs; Outstanding questions concerning Bt toxins K. whereas eCry3.1Ab and mCry3A proteins produced in Escherichia coli (E-coli) were used to conduct the safety studies, rather than proteins produced by the GM plant itself(11), meaning that the assessment of toxic effects is based on the assumed equivalence of E-coli-produced Bt toxins with the plant produced Bt toxins; whereas according to a Member State competent authority, in order to adequately take into account synergistic effects, assessments should not solely be based on tests with transgenic Bt toxins produced in microbial systems(12); L. whereas, furthermore, little significance can be attributed to toxicological tests conducted with proteins in isolation, due to the fact that Bt toxins in GM crops, such as maize, cotton and soybeans, are inherently more toxic than isolated Bt toxins; whereas this is because protease inhibitors (PI), present in the plant tissue, can increase the toxicity of the Bt toxins by delaying their degradation; whereas this phenomena has been demonstrated in a number of scientific studies, including one conducted for Monsanto 30 years ago which showed that even the presence of extremely low levels of PI enhanced the toxicity of Bt toxins up to 20-fold(13); M. whereas those effects have never been taken into account in EFSA risk assessments, even though they are relevant for all Bt plants approved for import or cultivation in the Union; whereas risks, arising from this enhanced toxicity due to the interaction between PI and Bt toxins, to humans and animals consuming food and feed containing Bt toxins cannot be ruled out; N. whereas a number of studies show that side effects have been observed that may affect the immune system following exposure to Bt toxins and that some Bt toxins may have adjuvant properties(14), meaning that they can increase the allergenicity of other proteins with which they come into contact; O. whereas assessment of the potential interaction of herbicide residues and their metabolites with Bt toxins is considered outside the remit of the EFSA GMO Panel and is therefore not undertaken as part of the risk assessment; whereas this is problematic since residues from spraying with glufosinate are known to disturb the microbiome which, for example, may enhance immune reactions in combination with Bt toxins(15); Bt crops: effects on non-target organisms and increased resistance P. whereas, unlike the use of insecticides, where exposure is at the time of spraying and for a limited time afterwards, the use of Bt GM crops leads to continuous exposure of the target and non-target organisms to Bt toxins; Q. whereas the assumption that Bt toxins exhibit a single target-specific mode-of-action can no longer be considered correct and effects on non-target organisms cannot be excluded(16); whereas an increasing number of non-target organisms are reported to be affected in many ways; whereas 39 peer-reviewed publications that report significant adverse effects of Bt toxins on many ‘out-of-range’ species are mentioned in a recent overview(17); R. whereas a range of non-target organisms in the Union could be exposed to Bt toxins via spillage, waste and manure resulting from the import of Bt crops; whereas no effects on non-target organisms were evaluated in the risk assessment; S. whereas the risk assessment did not consider the development of resistance in the target pests to Bt toxins, possibly resulting in the use of less environmentally safe pesticides or increased doses and the number of applications to the GM crop in the country of cultivation; whereas, the United States Environmental Protection Agency is planning to phase out many Bt corn hybrids, as well as some Bt cotton varieties, in the next three to five years, due to the growth in insect resistance to such crops(18); T. whereas, while it has been claimed that the use of Bt crops leads to a decrease in the use of insecticides, a recently published United States study(19), finds that ‘several analyses on the influence of Bt crops on pesticide-use patterns do not seem to have considered seed treatments and so may have overstated reductions in insecticide use (especially ‘area treated’) associated with Bt crops’; U. whereas the Union is party to the United Nations (UN) Convention on Biological Diversity (‘UN CBD’), which makes it clear that both exporting and importing countries have international responsibilities regarding biological diversity; Member State comments V. whereas Member States submitted many critical comments to EFSA during the three-month consultation period(20); whereas those critical comments include that the data submitted from the field trials are insufficient to establish that the trial sites are representative as regards agronomic practices or abiotic (e.g. soil moisture and fertility) and biotic factors (e.g. prevailing pest and disease pressure and weed profiles), that the scope of the comparative analysis is too narrow as it did not take into account the use of glufosinate on the GM maize, that the monitoring plan is insufficient to address the potential environmental effects of the GM maize, that the studies submitted by the applicant are not sufficient to conclude that the exposure to the environment and thus effects on non-target organisms will be negligible and that no final conclusion is possible with reference to long term reproductive or developmental effects of the whole food or feed; Upholding the Union’s international obligations W. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 provides that GM food or feed must not have adverse effects on human health, animal health or the environment, and requires the Commission to take into account any relevant provisions of Union law and other legitimate factors relevant to the matter under consideration when drafting its decision; whereas such legitimate factors should include the Union’s obligations under the UN Sustainable Development Goals (‘SDGs’), the Paris Climate Agreement and the UN CBD; X. whereas a 2017 report by the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the right to food found that, particularly in developing countries, hazardous pesticides have catastrophic impacts on health(21); whereas UN SDG Target 3.9 aims by 2030 to substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination(22); whereas authorising the import of the GM maize would increase demand for this crop treated with a herbicide that is toxic to reproduction and that is no longer authorised for use in the Union, thereby increasing the exposure of workers in third countries; whereas the risk of increased worker exposure is of particular concern in relation to herbicide-tolerant GM crops, given the higher volumes of herbicides used; Undemocratic decision-making Y. whereas the vote on 11 January 2021 of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health referred to in Article 35 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 delivered no opinion, meaning that the authorisation was not supported by a qualified majority of Member States; whereas 13 Member States (representing 35,52 % of the Union population) voted against authorisation, whilst only 10 Member States (representing 27,49 %) voted in favour; whereas 4 Member States (representing 37 %) abstained; Z. whereas the Commission recognises that the fact that GMO authorisation decisions continue to be adopted by the Commission without a qualified majority of Member States in favour, which is very much the exception for product authorisations as a whole but has become the norm for decision-making on GM food and feed authorisations, is problematic; AA. whereas, in its eighth term, the European Parliament adopted a total of 36 resolutions objecting to the placing on the market of GMOs for food and feed (33 resolutions) and to the cultivation of GMOs in the Union (three resolutions); whereas, in its ninth term, the European Parliament has already adopted 16 objections to placing GMOs on the market; whereas there was not a qualified majority of Member States in favour of authorising any of those GMOs; whereas the reasons for Member States not supporting authorisations include lack of respect for the precautionary principle in the authorisation process and scientific concerns relating to the risk assessment; AB. whereas despite its own acknowledgement of the democratic shortcomings, the lack of support from Member States and the objections of Parliament, the Commission continues to authorise GMOs; AC. whereas no change of law is required for the Commission to be able not to authorise GMOs when there is no qualified majority of Member States in favour in the Appeal Committee(23); 1. Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision exceeds the implementing powers provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003; 2. Considers that the draft Commission implementing decision is not consistent with Union law, in that it is not compatible with the aim of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, which is, in accordance with the general principles laid down in Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council(24), to provide the basis for ensuring a high level of protection of human life and health, animal health and welfare, and environmental and consumer interests, in relation to GM food and feed, while ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market; 3. Calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision; 4. Welcomes the fact that the Commission finally recognised, in a letter of 11 September 2020 to Members, the need to take sustainability into account when it comes to authorisation decisions on GMOs(25); expresses its deep disappointment, however, that, since then the Commission has continued to authorise GMOs for import into the Union, despite ongoing objections by Parliament and a majority of Member States voting against; 5. Calls on the Commission to move forward with the utmost urgency concerning the development of sustainability criteria, with full involvement of Parliament; calls on the Commission to provide information on how this process will be undertaken and in what timeframe; 6. Reiterates its call on the Commission not to authorise herbicide-tolerant GM crops until the health risks associated with the residues have been comprehensively investigated on a case-by-case basis, which requires a full assessment of the residues from spraying such GM crops with complementary herbicides, an assessment of the herbicide break-down products and any combinatorial effects, including with the GM plant itself; 7. Reiterates its call on the Commission not to authorise the import for food or feed uses of any GM plant which has been made tolerant to a herbicide-active substance that is not authorised for use in the Union; 8. Calls on EFSA to finally accept the substantial differences between native Bt toxins and those expressed by synthetic transgenes in GM crop plants, and to widen its risk assessment in order to fully take into account all interactions and combinatorial effects between Bt-toxins, GM plants and their constituents, residues from spraying with the complementary herbicides, the environment as well as impacts on health and food safety; 9. Calls on EFSA to no longer accept toxicity studies based on isolated proteins which are likely to be different in structure and biological effects compared to those produced by the plant itself, and to require that all tests are carried out with tissue from the GM plant; 10. Calls on EFSA to make sure that data from field trials or greenhouses cover a sufficiently broad range of agronomic and environmental conditions to assess the impact of all stress factors which have to be expected during cultivation on gene expression and plant composition; 11. Calls on EFSA to make sure that the data from field trials or greenhouses cover a sufficiently broad range of different varieties to assess the impact of various genetic backgrounds on gene expression and plant composition; 12. Calls on EFSA to request data on the impact of the consumption of food and feed derived from GM plants on the intestinal microbiome; 13. Urges the Commission, again, to take into account the Union’s obligations under international agreements, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the UN CBD and the UN SDGs; 14. Highlights that the amendments adopted by the European Parliament on 17 December 2020 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 182/2011(26), which were adopted in Parliament as a basis for negotiations with the Council, state that the Commission shall not authorise GMOs when there is not a qualified majority of Member States in favour; insists that the Commission respect this position and calls on the Council to proceed with its work and adopt a general approach on this file as a matter of urgency; 15. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Activities of the European Ombudsman - annual report 2019 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2019, – having regard to Articles 15, 24(3), 228 and 298(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), – having regard to Article 10(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), – having regard to Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of the European Parliament of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties(1), – having regard to Articles 11, 41, 42 and 43 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’), – having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, – having regard to its previous resolutions on the European Ombudsman’s activities, – having regard to Rules 54, 142(2) and 232(1) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2019 on the Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry OI/2/2017 on the transparency of legislative discussions in the preparatory bodies of the Council of the EU(2), – having regard to the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour adopted by Parliament on 6 September 2001, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Petitions (A9-0013/2021), A. whereas the annual report on the activities of the European Ombudsman in 2019 was formally submitted to the President of Parliament on 5 May 2020 and whereas the European Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, presented the report to the Committee on Petitions in Brussels on 3 September 2020; B. whereas Emily O’Reilly was re-elected European Ombudsman by Parliament at its plenary sitting in Strasbourg on 18 December 2019; C. whereas Article 41(1) of the Charter states that ‘every person has the right to have his or her affairs handled impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union’; D. whereas Article 43 of the Charter states that ‘any citizen of the Union and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State has the right to refer to the European Ombudsman cases of maladministration in the activities of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the Union, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role’; E. whereas it is essential that EU citizens have enough information to be able to follow EU policy and law making, and participate meaningfully in European democratic processes; whereas people’s trust in public administrations is enhanced when they can see that institutions are working for the public good and maintaining high ethical standards; F. whereas the Ombudsman’s main priority is to ensure that citizens’ rights are fully upheld, in accordance with the Treaties and the Charter, and that the right to good administration reflects the highest standards expected of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, with the exception of the activities carried out by the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role; whereas the Ombudsman plays a vital role in helping EU institutions become more open, effective and citizen-friendly with the aim of strengthening citizens’ confidence in the Union; G. whereas the European Ombudsman launched a strategic initiative on the leave rights of certain EU staff members and the best interests of the child (SI/1/2019/AMF)(3), which led to the harmonisation of the rules of the Commission and the Council on the leave rights of staff members who become parents through surrogacy; whereas no comparable results were produced at the European Parliament owing to an unwillingness to adapt its rules on leave; H. whereas 2020 marks the 25th anniversary of the establishment of the European Ombudsman; whereas since its opening, the Ombudsman’s office has dealt with 57 000 complaints leading to over 7 300 inquiries; whereas the continuous efforts of the office and its staff towards respecting and upholding transparency, ethics and accountability in the EU administration should be duly recognised and commended; I. whereas, according to the Eurobarometer survey conducted in June 2019, 44 % of citizens trust the European Union and 46 % do not; whereas it is essential for the institutions to be held accountable so as to increase the level of satisfaction of EU citizens; J. whereas Article 10(3) TEU provides that ‘every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union’ and that ‘decisions shall be taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen’; K. whereas Article 24 TFEU provides that ‘every citizen of the Union may apply to the Ombudsman established in accordance with Article 228’; L. whereas Article 228 TFEU empowers the Ombudsman to conduct inquiries into maladministration in the activities of the Union institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role; M. whereas 19 619 citizens requested assistance from the Ombudsman in 2019, and 16 045 were given advice via the interactive guide on the Ombudsman’s website; whereas in 2019 the Ombudsman registered 2 201 complaints and received 1 373 requests for information; N. whereas of the 2 201 complaints dealt with by the Ombudsman, 879 fell within and 1 330 outside her remit; O. whereas of the 2 201 complaints, the Ombudsman provided advice to the complainant or passed the matter on in 862 cases, in 883 cases the complainant was informed that no additional advice could be provided, and 456 complaints gave rise to an inquiry; P. whereas of the inquiries closed by the Ombudsman, 26,9 % concerned requests for information and access to documents, 22 % concerned service culture, for example kindness towards citizens, language-related matters and time limits, 19,8 % concerned the appropriate use of discretionary powers, including in infringement proceedings, 13,2 % concerned respect for procedural rights, including the right to be heard, 13 % concerned the proper management of administrative and staff matters, 12,3 % concerned recruitment and 8.4 % concerned respect for fundamental rights; Q. whereas the length of most of the inquiries closed by the Ombudsman in 2019 ranged between three (43,4 %) and 18 months (10,2 %); whereas the average length of time needed to close an inquiry was less than seven months; R. whereas as part of her inquiries, the European Ombudsman is entitled to submit proposals to EU institutions and bodies on how to address a problem or improve their administrative practices; whereas these proposals take the form of solutions, recommendations and suggestions; S. whereas according to the annual ‘Putting it Right?’ report, published in December 2019, which analyses the institutions’ responses to the Ombudsman’s proposals in the context of inquiries closed in 2018, the implementation rate achieved by the EU institutions in response to the Ombudsman’s proposals is 77 %; whereas 11 institutions achieved an implementation rate of 100 %, while the Commission, the institution against which a majority of the complaints were lodged, achieved a rate of 70,9 %; T. whereas in her strategic work in 2019 the Ombudsman opened four new strategic inquiries: on transparency in the preparatory bodies of the Eurogroup, on the ‘revolving doors’ at the Commission, on the treatment of persons with disabilities under the EU Joint Sickness Insurance Scheme, and on the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the activities prior to the submission of medicinal products with a view to their authorisation; U. whereas in 2019 the Ombudsman opened nine strategic initiatives, including on the effectiveness of the mechanisms put in place by the Member States for dealing with complaints relating to the Structural Funds, on the transparency of the Brexit negotiations, on the transparency of EU lobbying and the EU Transparency Register, on the EU procedure for food risk assessment, on the transparency of meetings between the President of the European Council and interest representatives, on improvements to the European Citizens’ Initiative, on the integration of children with disabilities into European Schools and on the right to leave of EU staff members who become parents through surrogacy; V. whereas the role of the European Ombudsman as a member of the EU Framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) is to protect, promote and monitor its implementation at the level of the EU institutions; whereas the European Ombudsman chaired the EU Framework in 2019; W. whereas Article 19 of the UNCRPD provides that the parties ‘recognise the equal right of all persons with disabilities to live in the community, with choices equal to others, and shall take effective and appropriate measures to facilitate full enjoyment by persons with disabilities of this right and their full inclusion and participation in the community’; X. whereas on 12 February 2019 Parliament approved its draft regulation laying down the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (Statute of the European Ombudsman)(4); whereas this new regulation is now awaiting approval by the Council; Y. whereas in 2019 the European Ombudsman opened 458 inquiries, of which 2 were opened on its own initiative, while closing 560 inquiries (552 complaint-based and 8 own-initiative); whereas the greater part of the inquiries once again concerned the Commission (274 inquiries or 59,7 %), followed by the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) (44 inquiries or 9,6 %) and the EU agencies (33 inquiries or 7,2 %), and the rest were distributed as follows: Parliament (21 inquiries or 4,6 %), the European External Action Service (EEAS) (17 inquiries or 3,7 %), the European Investment Bank (7 inquiries or 1,5 %), and other institutions (54 inquiries or 11,8 %); Z. whereas the proper application of EU law and the fulfilment of the obligations arising therefrom are the responsibility of the institutions and bodies of the EU, in line with the obligations stemming from the Treaties and the Charter; AA. whereas the Ombudsman launched an inquiry into the decision of the European Banking Authority (EBA), announced publicly on 17 September 2019, to allow its Executive Director to become Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME), a lobby organisation for the financial industry; whereas the Ombudsman found instances of maladministration by the EBA in its failure to mitigate the risks of conflicts of interest when it approved the job move and in continuing to give its outgoing Executive Director access to confidential information; AB. whereas the Ombudsman launched an inquiry following a complaint concerning corporate sponsorship of the Presidency of the Council of the EU; whereas the Ombudsman noted that the use of sponsorship by the Presidency entails reputational risks for the EU as a whole and recommended that the Council issue guidance to Member States on the issue of sponsorship of the Presidency in order to mitigate these reputational risks; AC. whereas on 30 July 2019 the Commission issued an invitation to tender for a study in order to develop tools and mechanisms on integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) objectives into EU banking rules; whereas the Commission decided to award the contract to BlackRock Investment Management, a company managing investments in large fossil fuel companies and systemically important banks, which are sectors impacted by new rules on ESG issues at EU level; whereas the Ombudsman found in her inquiry related to this case that the Commission should have been more vigilant and that its decision to award the contract to BlackRock did not provide sufficient guarantees to exclude the risk of conflicts of interest with serious negative consequences on the performance of the contract, as the company manifestly had an interest in the development of future EU regulation that will impact on itself and on its clients; 1. Welcomes the annual report for 2019 presented by the European Ombudsman; 2. Congratulates Emily O’Reilly on her re-election as European Ombudsman and on her excellent work; endorses her commitment to continuing her efforts to ‘ensure that the EU delivers the highest standards of administration, transparency and ethics’, and to guaranteeing the accessibility and quality of the services that the EU provides to EU citizens; reiterates that transparency is a principle complementary to the rule of law and democracy and that its implementation should be aimed at allowing citizens to participate in the decision-making process; Transparency and ethics 3. Expresses satisfaction with its fruitful relationship with the European Ombudsman, a key and indispensable partner of the European Parliament, which re-elected the outgoing Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, for a second term of office and endorsed her proposal for a special report on transparency in the Council by adopting a resolution approved by a plenary majority in January 2019; 4. Welcomes the close cooperation between the Ombudsman and her team and the Committee on Petitions, which makes it possible to improve the quality of European administration and the accessibility and quality of its services for EU citizens; 5. Stresses the need for the EU institutions to maintain the maximum level of transparency and objectivity, so that citizens can follow and take an active part in the decision-making process in order to strengthen their trust in and feeling of proximity to the institutions, while guaranteeing access to all relevant information so that they can fully exercise their democratic rights and ensuring a genuine capacity to hold the institutions to account; underlines that the Ombudsman opened an inquiry into the Commission’s refusal to give public access to documents concerning the purchase of vaccines against COVID-19; calls for the full publication of contracts and other agreements signed with pharmaceutical companies, including documents related to the negotiations held with the latter, for the development, manufacturing, purchase and deployment of vaccines against COVID-19, as well as the full transparency of all results concerning clinical trials related to these vaccines; 6. Highlights that the lack of transparency of the EU legislative process increases citizens’ distrust and weakens the legitimacy of the decision-making process as a whole; 7. Welcomes the European Ombudsman’s ambition to maintain in all circumstances a high level of vigilance in upholding the highest possible standards of transparency and ethics, including in a health crisis; 8. Urges the European Ombudsman to continue promoting greater transparency in legislative discussions in the preparatory bodies of the Council of the European Union, as regards both public access to its legislative documents and its decision-making process, so that its deliberations can be more readily understood; 9. Urges the Council to implement the European Ombudsman’s recommendations, and to revise its confidentiality policy to ensure the highest level of transparency in its work so that timely public access to legislative documents is easily available; calls for the transparent and systematic identification of Member State governments when they set out their positions, since as co-legislator the Council must be held accountable to the public for its actions; recalls the suggestions made in its resolution on the Ombudsman’s strategic inquiry OI/2/2017 on the transparency of legislative discussions in the preparatory bodies of the Council of the EU; 10. Regrets the practice of Member States holding the Presidency of the Council of accepting corporate sponsorship; believes that such a practice must be prevented in order to preserve the reputation and integrity of the Council and of the EU as a whole; 11. Urges Member States to be more diligent in meeting their obligation to cooperate with the Ombudsman; 12. Notes that, in keeping with the European Ombudsman’s recommendations, the Commission and the Council have maintained a high level of transparency in the legislative process throughout the negotiations on EU-UK relations, publishing more than 100 negotiating documents and making the Chief Negotiator’s timetable available to citizens, and urges them to do the same when drawing up the future free trade agreement; calls more broadly on the Commission to fulfil its obligations regarding sustainability impact assessments of all EU trade agreements; 13. Points out that for years transparency, and in particular access to documents, has been the main subject of complaints, and welcomes the fact that in connection with a number of inquiries the European Ombudsman has called for public access to be granted; deplores, however, the fact that the European Ombudsman’s recommendations are not always implemented and that OLAF’s report on the use of a loan granted to the German car manufacturer Volkswagen has still not been published; calls for EU legislation on access to documents (Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001(5)) to be updated in order to facilitate the European Ombudsman’s work; urges the Council to reopen its discussions on the basis of the resolution of the European Parliament of 12 June 2013 on the deadlock on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001(6); 14. Welcomes the more ambitious approach taken to the transparency of the bodies preparing meetings of the Eurogroup, which agreed, following a request from the Ombudsman, to publish the dates and draft agendas of Eurogroup meetings earlier than before, to provide more details in the letters summarising the meetings and to include more information on the Eurogroup website concerning its activities; 15. Welcomes the European Ombudsman’s repeated efforts to combat conflicts of interest; stresses the need for increased transparency in the Council; strongly supports the recommendations issued by the Ombudsman to the General Secretariat of the Council in relation to case 1946/2018/KR; welcomes the publication, following this inquiry, of the minutes of meetings held between lobbyists, the President of the European Council and the members of his cabinet, and highlights the need for the adoption of a fair and ambitious legal act on the Transparency Register in order to make it fully mandatory and legally binding for all EU institutions and agencies and to create obligations for third parties and interest representatives, thereby ensuring the full transparency of lobbying; notes the Commission’s decision not to follow the recommendations of the Ombudsman in case 1302/2017/MH and not to grant access to the documents relating to the opinions of its Legal Service concerning the Transparency Register; 16. Supports the Ombudsman’s activity performed in her inquiry 853/2020/KR concerning the BlackRock case and firmly believes that the Commission must follow the Ombudsman’s recommendations in this regard; calls, therefore, on the Commission to update and strengthen all applicable rules concerning public procurement procedures, including its guidelines, in order to prevent the occurrence of any conflicts of interest; calls on the Commission to adopt all necessary measures to preserve the integrity and credibility of policy-making related to the adoption of new rules on ESG issues at EU level; 17. Welcomes the fact that, following a complaint lodged in 2019 regarding the use of sponsorship during the Romanian Presidency, the European Ombudsman took a clear stance on the issue of Presidency sponsorship(7), as the perception of outside influence may undermine the integrity of the EU as a whole; takes note of the steps taken by the Council in response to the Ombudsman’s recommendation that guidance should be provided to the Member States on the issue of Presidency sponsorship; encourages the Council to follow up on the issue without delay; welcomes the decision of the German Presidency to refrain from any sponsorship and encourages other Member States to follow suit; 18. Notes the undertaking given by the Commission, following an inquiry by the Ombudsman, to publish the agendas and minutes of meetings of the ‘advisory bodies’ which influence EU policy-making and the comments made by participants in previous groups, and, for any future such group, to apply the same standards of transparency as those adopted by the expert groups; 19. Highlights the importance of public access to documents containing the positions taken by Member States in decision-making processes; supports the findings of the Ombudsman in relation to case 2142/2018/EWM and deplores the Commission’s continued refusal to grant access to the requested documents dealing with the risk assessment of pesticides on bees; 20. Notes that the Commission has committed to implementing many of the European Ombudsman’s proposals, such as asking individuals who switch to the private sector to provide additional information about the organisation they are joining and more details about the type of professional activity they are embarking on; emphasises that such transfers cannot be taken lightly, as they could lead to conflicts of interest when former public officials take up a job with a firm to lobby on policies that they previously legislated or worked on; notes that according to a recent report(8) 99 % of requests for transfer into the private sector were approved by the Commission, with a rejection rate of only 0,62 %, which points to the need to strengthen oversight; recalls that ethics rules are not a mere formality and should be adhered to by all institutions; urges the Commission to implement all recommendations made by the Ombudsman, to take a more robust approach to the issue of ‘revolving doors’ and to follow through with the proposed measures, including forbidding new activity when there is evidence that this activity would lead to a conflict with the public interest and publishing, directly on its ethics website and in a timely manner, all related information on each case of former senior staff members assessed with a view to implementing the one-year lobbying and advocacy ban; 21. Points out that the EU public administration must improve those of its rules and standards designed to prevent conflicts of interest and guarantee respect for the duty of discretion and integrity; calls on the European Ombudsman to promote the highest ethics rules and standards throughout the EU institutions, agencies and bodies, ensuring that they are fully and consistently implemented; calls for the evaluation of the declarations of interests submitted by Commissioners-designate to be carried out independently by appropriate means; underlines the need to revise the current rules and practices in order to strengthen integrity requirements for Commissioners both during and after their mandates and stresses that Commissioners’ post-term-of-office notification periods must be increased; 22. Underlines the urgent need for the existing Code of Good Administrative Behaviour to be improved and upgraded by adopting a binding regulation on the matter; 23. Commends the Ombudsman’s activities on revolving doors cases which have led, inter alia, to the EBA revising its policy on the assessment of post-employment restrictions and prohibitions for staff, as well as improving its procedures for the immediate suspension of access to confidential information for staff known to be moving to another job; calls on the Ombudsman to continue her efforts to ensure that all EU institutions and agencies introduce effective rules aimed at preventing revolving doors cases and any possible conflicts of interest; 24. Fully endorses the European Ombudsman’s confirmation of her finding that four instances of maladministration marred the appointment process of the most senior Commission official, and welcomes the new Commission’s introduction in 2019 of a specific appointment procedure for its Secretary-General, which includes the publication of a vacancy notice and the inclusion of the appointment on the agenda of the weekly meeting of Commissioners, with sufficient time for it to be given proper consideration; 25. Notes that, following the own-initiative inquiry undertaken by the Ombudsman, the EMA introduced measures aimed at improving the independence and objectivity of the marketing authorisation process for medicinal products and increasing transparency in areas such as clinical trials; calls on the EMA to implement the Ombudsman’s new recommendations in order to ensure its independence and impartiality and avoid any conflict of interest; 26. Welcomes the increased and necessary importance attached by the European Ombudsman to problems involving procurement procedures; 27. Welcomes the consolidation of the Award for Good Administration, which aims to reward initiatives and projects by the EU administration that have a positive impact on the lives of EU citizens; congratulates the Commission on its receipt of the award in recognition of its strategy to reduce plastic pollution; considers that greater media coverage of this award would show EU citizens that the EU institutions are working to provide tangible solutions; 28. Welcomes the European Ombudsman’s increased focus on cases concerning the Commission’s management of EU-funded projects; urges the Commission to guarantee the transparent distribution and management of funds; insists that the Commission improve the transparency of its preparation process for the annual Work Programmes for the funds it manages; calls, in particular, on the Commission to ensure that resources made available through the European Structural and Investment Funds are disbursed by the Member States in accordance with the requirements laid down in the UNCRPD on independent living for persons with disabilities; 29. Invites the Committee on Petitions to examine cases in which the Ombudsman’s proposals to the EU institutions were not acted upon; Disability 30. Welcomes the European Ombudsman’s role in protecting, promoting and monitoring the implementation of the UNCRPD by the EU administration, and in strengthening the EU agenda for the rights of persons with disabilities; calls on the Ombudsman to closely monitor the proposals made by the Commission concerning the new European Disability Strategy for the post-2020 period; considers it urgent to address the lack of an appropriate legal basis ensuring that EU spending complies fully with the UNCRPD; 31. Congratulates the European Ombudsman on her strategic inquiry into the accessibility of Commission websites for persons with disabilities, and welcomes the Commission’s efforts to put her ideas into practice by providing more information in easy-to-read formats; notes, however, that a complex approach is needed to make the EU institutions’ home pages accessible to persons with all kinds of disabilities, including national sign languages; suggests that disabled persons’ organisations should be involved in this process; 32. Congratulates the Ombudsman on having opened a necessary inquiry into the accessibility of online tools used by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), following a complaint by a person with a visual impairment; 33. Calls on the Commission to propose a comprehensive, ambitious and long-term European Disability Strategy for the post-2020 period in order to make possible, inter alia, the full and consistent implementation of the UNCRPD; 34. Acknowledges the rise in the number of people helped by the Ombudsman’s office in 2019 compared to 2018 (19 619 up from 17 996), as well as its efforts to find practical solutions to citizens’ problems, whether by providing advice through the interactive guide on the website and replying to requests for information, or in its handling of new complaints (2 201 such complaints in 2019); points out the need to ensure that the office has the necessary budgetary and personnel resources to continue helping EU citizens in an adequate and efficient manner; Complaints 35. Notes that in 2019 the Ombudsman received numerous complaints from EU citizens residing in a Member State other than their own who encountered difficulties in trying to register for and/or vote in the 2019 European Parliament elections, and points out that the right to vote in elections is a fundamental right recognised in the EU Treaties; 36. Congratulates the Ombudsman on the inquiries opened in 2019, which covered the following main topics: transparency in the EU institutions, the transparency of lobbying activities, service culture, fundamental rights, ethics issues, citizens’ participation in EU decision-making, the proper management of staff issues and recruitment, and sound financial management; 37. Notes that in 2019 the Ombudsman dealt with 1 300 complaints which did not fall within her mandate, mainly because they did not concern the activities of an EU institution or body; endorses the Ombudsman’s approach of replying to everyone who seeks her assistance, explaining her mandate to them and providing advice, and redirecting them, as far as possible, to other bodies which may be able to help them, and encourages her to continue to do so; 38. Urges the European Ombudsman to remain vigilant and resolute in handling complaints concerning fundamental rights, including equality, non-discrimination and the right to be heard; welcomes her inquiry into the European Asylum Support Office and her interviews with asylum seekers, and her inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a complaint concerning discrimination against Roma in Italy; 39. Notes that the number of inquiries concerning EPSO rose from 23 in 2018 to 44 in 2019; urges the European Ombudsman to monitor closely the proper implementation of anti-discrimination measures which apply to all recruitment procedures; suggests a strategic inquiry into the methods used by EPSO and other agencies in order to ascertain that principles of fairness and openness are fully in place in all recruitment procedures; 40. Notes that the number of complaints falling outside the Ombudsman’s mandate has remained relatively stable (1 330 cases in 2019 compared to 1 300 cases in 2018); takes the view that better and coordinated communication at the level of all the EU institutions as to the competencies of the European Ombudsman could help to reduce the number of complaints falling outside its mandate and streamline the response to citizens’ problems; 41. Welcomes the European Ombudsman’s commitment to the right of citizens to be involved in the EU democratic process, as demonstrated by her organising of the annual conference of the European Network of Ombudsmen in April 2019 on the need to strengthen citizens’ participation in the democratic process; endorses her decision to reply to all those seeking assistance in the language of their complaint, and calls on the EU public administration to make every effort to ensure that citizens are able to communicate effectively with her in the 24 official languages of the EU and in national sign languages; welcomes the European Ombudsman’s draft guidelines on the use of languages on the websites of the EU institutions; underlines that such guidelines are of the utmost importance in protecting Europe’s rich linguistic diversity; notes that the websites of the EU institutions should better exemplify the equality of all 24 official EU languages; deplores the fact that many sections of the EU institutions’ websites and the publications uploaded to them continue only to be available in certain popular languages and never get coverage in all 24 official EU languages as required by the principles of the Union; 42. Endorses the efforts of the EU institutions to follow the Ombudsman’s recommendations (77 %) and encourages them to continue in this direction; remains concerned at the persistent rate of non-compliance (23 %); is aware that the Ombudsman’s suggestions are not legally binding; urges the institutions, bodies and agencies to react promptly, effectively and responsibly to the Ombudsman’s recommendations and critical remarks; 43. Welcomes the fact that, on average, the length of inquiries into cases closed by the European Ombudsman in 2019 was less than seven months; notes, however, that closure of some cases can take up to 18 months; calls on all the EU institutions to improve their cooperation with the office of the Ombudsman in the interest of EU citizens, who expect swift answers to their problems; 44. Welcomes the redesign of the Ombudsman’s website, making it a more accessible and functional instrument for EU citizens; encourages the Ombudsman to further develop the translation of her publications into the different languages of the EU; 45. Acknowledges the important contribution made by the European Network of Ombudsmen to the exchange of best practices and in providing information on the remit and competences of its members and the proper implementation of European law; suggests that this network could be more closely involved in overseeing the proper use of EU funds; suggests that it could also offer support to national or regional ombudsmen who come under strong pressure from their governments, particularly in connection with violations of rights guaranteed by the Charter; calls on this network to consider the role that national and regional ombudsmen could play in increasing the involvement of EU citizens in the EU decision-making process; stresses that the network could also contribute to promoting a culture of good administration at the level of the Member States by enhancing cooperation and raising awareness among national ombudsmen of the importance of defending the rights of citizens; points out that resources allocated to the network should be strengthened; calls on the European Ombudsman to organise, at the European Ombudsman’s seat, a regular meeting of the European Network of Ombudsmen, whose core task is to ensure respect for fundamental rights; 46. Strongly welcomes the European Ombudsman’s strategic initiative on the leave rights of certain EU staff members and the best interests of the child; takes the position that the inconsistency of the European Parliament’s rules with those of the other institutions(9) with regard to the leave rights of staff members who become parents through surrogacy, such as infertile, same-sex and single parents, ignores the primacy of the overriding best interests of the child and places such staff members at a significant risk of discrimination; recalls the conclusions of the Ombudsman regarding the importance of protecting the best interests of the child; calls for Parliament to engage in interinstitutional dialogue and to adopt a decision harmonising these rules with those of the Council and the Commission; Statute and powers 47. Calls on the Council to engage in dialogue with the European Parliament regarding the revision of the Statute of the European Ombudsman, so that the Ombudsman’s office is better able to promote the highest standards of ethical behaviour in the institutions and is properly mandated to perform its tasks effectively; 48. Calls for Parliament to overhaul the nomination process for the election of the European Ombudsman, so that the election at the beginning of the parliamentary term can take place in a more informed, uniform, transparent and orderly manner; calls specifically for a more detailed description of the time limits for the collection of signatures and the campaigns of the nominees; 49. Congratulates the European Ombudsman on her previous five-year strategy ‘Towards 2019’, which introduced a more strategic approach to promoting good administration; welcomes the publication on 7 December 2020 of the new strategy ‘Towards 2024’, which will have to take account of the unprecedented situation facing Europe in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; 50. Recalls that the seat of the Ombudsman is that of the European Parliament; encourages the Ombudsman, therefore, to prioritise the use of the premises available in Strasbourg; 51. Calls on the Ombudsman, in the interests of transparency, to continue publishing the events which she intends to host, stating where each event will take place; o 52. Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the report of the Committee on Petitions to the Council, the Commission, the European Ombudsman, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and their ombudsmen or similar competent bodies.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| European Semester: Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in particular Articles 121, 126 and 136 thereof and Protocol No 12, – having regard to Protocol No 1 on the role of national parliaments in the European Union, – having regard to Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, – having regard to the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union, – having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1175/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies(1), – having regard to Council Directive 2011/85/EU of 8 November 2011 on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States(2), – having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1174/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area(3), – having regard to Council Regulation (EU) No 1177/2011 of 8 November 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure(4), – having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances(5), – having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area(6), – having regard to Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on common provisions for monitoring and assessing draft budgetary plans and ensuring the correction of excessive deficit of the Member States in the euro area(7), – having regard to Regulation (EU) No 472/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on the strengthening of economic and budgetary surveillance of Member States in the euro area experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability(8), – having regard to the Commission communication of 20 March 2020 on the activation of the general escape clause of the Stability and Growth Pact (COM(2020)0123), – having regard to the Commission communication of 27 May 2020 entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ (COM(2020)0456), – having regard to the Commission communication of 27 May 2020 on the EU budget powering the recovery plan for Europe (COM(2020)0442), – having regard to the Commission proposal of 28 May 2020 for a Council Regulation establishing a European Union Recovery Instrument to support the recovery in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic (COM(2020)0441), – having regard to the Commission communications of 17 September 2020 entitled ‘Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021’ (COM(2020)0575) and of 18 November 2020 entitled ‘Alert Mechanism Report 2021’ (COM(2020)0745), – having regard to the European Fiscal Board annual report of 29 October 2019, the European Fiscal Board statement of 24 March 2020 on COVID-19 and the European Fiscal Board’s assessment of 1 July 2020 of the fiscal stance appropriate for the euro area in 2021, – having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2020 on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources(9), – having regard to the Commission’s European Economic Forecast: Winter 2021 (Institutional Paper 144)(10), – having regard to the European Council recommendations of 10-11 December 2020 on the MFF and Next Generation EU, COVID-19, climate change, security and external relations (EUCO 22/20), – having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, – having regard to the letter from the Committee on Regional Development, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A9-0036/2021), A. whereas the European Semester plays an essential role in coordinating economic, budgetary and employment policies in the Member States, which serves to ensure sound public finances, to prevent excessive macroeconomic imbalances, to support structural reforms and to boost investment, and currently represents the framework used to guide the Union and the Member States through the challenges of the recovery based on the EU’s policy priorities; whereas since the 2008 sovereign debt crisis, the Union is much more robust to face crises, but new challenges to macroeconomic stability are emerging; B. whereas the Union and its Member States have committed to the Treaty-based fundamental values, the implementation of the UN 2030 Agenda, the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) and the Paris Climate Agreement; C. whereas aspects relating to the possible future of the EU fiscal framework will be dealt with by the review of the macroeconomic legislative framework in the own-initiative report of the European Parliament dedicated to that issue; notes that the framework will be reviewed, and should be adapted according to its outcome; D. whereas the employment and social aspects of the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy (ASGS) are dealt with by the twin report entitled ‘European Semester for economic policy coordination: Employment and Social Aspects in the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021’; E. whereas high levels of public debt may represent a heavy burden on future generations’ shoulders and drag on the recovery; F. whereas the pandemic has hit all Member States, creating a symmetrical shock, but the scale of the impact, specific economic exposures and initial conditions, as well as the pace and the strength of the recovery will vary significantly; G. whereas the good times need to be used to implement structural reforms, in particular measures aimed at reducing budget deficits, government debt and non-performing loans and to prepare for another possible economic crisis or recession; H. whereas women have been disproportionately affected as a result of the crisis and the proposed recovery response addresses the challenges related to the COVID-19 crisis in the care sector and the specific challenges faced by women; I. whereas Member States have taken sizeable fiscal measures in response to the pandemic (4,2 % of GDP in 2020 and 2,4 % of GDP in 2021); whereas output in the European economy would barely return to pre-pandemic levels in 2022; J. whereas the recovery and resilience plans adopted by the Member States will encompass their national agenda of reforms and investments designed in line with the EU policy objectives, centred, among others, on the green and digital transitions; I.COVID-crisis, Recovery and Resilience Facility, temporary adjustment of the Semester 1. Takes note of the fact that the European Semester and the Recovery and Resilience Facility are closely intertwined; notes that the assessment of the recovery and resilience plans (RRPs) will be made against 11 criteria grouped under relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and coherence; invites the Commission to scrutinise the plans thoroughly in order to ensure that the recovery generates European added value, improves Member States’ long-term competitiveness and sustainable growth prospects, and guides European economies to address the challenges and reap the benefits of the green and digital transitions, the EPSR and UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); 2. Welcomes, furthermore, the rapid and intense initial response to the crisis in the area of monetary and fiscal policy, at both EU and Member State level, as well as the adoption of the next MFF and Next Generation EU (NGEU); calls on the Commission and the Council to accelerate the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility in order for funding to be disbursed quickly; stresses that, in order to be successful, the climate and digital transitions must have the social and single market dimensions at their core; insists that funds and resources be directed to projects and beneficiaries that spend the resources responsibly, effectively and on viable, sustainable projects that generate the highest possible impact; recalls the role the European Parliament will play in the Recovery and Resilience dialogue established by the RRF Regulation, which will also see its competent committees scrutinise the link between the European Semester and the RRF; 3. Highlights that the goal of the Recovery and Resilience Facility is to make Member States’ economies and societies more resilient, while striving for competitive sustainability, convergence and cohesion within the EU; emphasises that national ownership and transparency will be essential elements for the swift and successful implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the recovery plans; considers it essential, therefore, for debates to be held in national parliaments, for the Commission to cooperate with the national authorities and relevant stakeholders proactively in order to discuss the draft national plans at an early stage, making tailor-made solutions and specific reforms possible; 4. Welcomes the fact that in order to cope with the unprecedented crisis caused by COVID-19, the Member States and the EU institutions established NGEU in order to help the recovery; notes, therefore, that the RRF creates a unique opportunity for delivering on the reforms and investments needed for the EU to get ready to cope with the present challenges; 5. Believes that the symmetrical effects of COVID-19 have actually widened the socio-economic rift between EU Member States and their regions; 6. Further notes that the deadlines of the European Semester and the Recovery and Resilience Facility will overlap, which requires the temporary adjustment of the Semester process in order to properly launch the Recovery and Resilience Facility; stresses that the EU’s recovery provides a unique opportunity to provide guidance to Member States on where reforms and investments are most needed in order to accelerate the transition to a more sustainable, resilient and inclusive EU; 7. Supports the Commission’s guidance to Member States to include in their RRPs investments and reforms in flagship areas that are in line with the EU’s objective of just climate and digital transitions; 8. Considers that the four dimensions of social and environmental sustainability, productivity, fairness and stability identified in the 2020 ASGS should be considered in the preparation of the Member States’ recovery and resilience plans, which are to be centred around the six pillars defined in the Regulation establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility; reiterates that in order to ensure transparency, the Commission will transmit the national recovery and resilience plans drawn up by Member States to both the Council and the European Parliament simultaneously; 9. Underlines that the Regulation establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility recognises that women have been particularly affected by the COVID-19 crisis, as they represent the majority of healthcare workers across the Union and balance unpaid care work with their employment responsibilities; 10. Considers that the temporary adaptation of this year’s cycle cannot override the original purpose and function, and must not impede the further evolution of the European Semester; recalls that the European Semester cycle is a well-established framework for EU Member States to coordinate their budgetary, economic, social and employment policies, and after the COVID-19 crisis, a functioning European Semester will be needed more than ever to coordinate these policies across the European Union, but also notes that the Semester, since the inception, has been expanded to include, among others, issues related to the financial sector and taxation, as well as objectives of the UN SDGs in the European Semester, giving due consideration to the people of our planet in our economic policy; notes that in order to further strengthen economic and social resilience, the EU must deliver on the principles of the EPSR; recalls that promoting stronger and sustainable growth in a sustainable manner means promoting responsible fiscal policies, structural reforms, effective investment, digital transformation and green and just transitions; invites the Member States and the Commission to strike a proper balance between boosting sustainable, growth-friendly public and private investment and structural reforms in the recovery plans; 11. Believes that the 2021 European Semester exercise offers a great opportunity to improve national ownership, given that Member States are developing tailor-made RRPs to respond to their different needs; in this regard, is convinced that democratic legitimacy must be guaranteed and eventually increased, including the proper role of the European Parliament in the implementation of the Facility, as enshrined in the Regulation establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility; calls on the Member States to build up, using, if necessary, the Technical Support Instrument, the necessary administrative and monitoring capacity to provide firm guarantees of the proper and efficient use of funds, as well as a high level of absorption capacity; recalls that RRPs are subject to the horizontal requirements of sound economic governance and the general regime of rules for the protection of the Union budget; II.Economic prospects for the EU 12. Notes with great concern the extremely difficult situation EU economies find themselves in and that, according to the Commission’s Winter 2021 economic forecast, GDP fell by an unprecedented rate in both the euro area and the EU as a whole; notes that EU GDP has contracted by 6,3 % (6,8 % in the euro area) in 2020, whereas an economic recovery of 3,7 % (3,8 % in the euro area) is forecast in 2021; 13. Highlights that the unprecedented economic recession in 2020 and the measures taken in response to the pandemic are set to push the EU debt-to-GDP ratio up to a new peak of around 93,9 % (101,7 % in the euro area) in 2020, with a further forecasted increase to around 94,6 % (102,3 % in the euro area) in 2021; highlights that a high level of uncertainty persists and that the economic outlook very much depends on how quickly the pandemic can be overcome; understands, furthermore, that these debt levels can be sustained by sufficient economic growth; reiterates the importance of the long-term sustainability of sovereign debt; notes that many Member States have entered the current crisis in a weak fiscal position, which is being further worsened by the pandemic; 14. Is concerned about the remarkably negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the EU’s economy, particularly on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the single market and its competitiveness and underlines the importance of the implementation of the European Green Deal, the EPSR and the UN SDGs; believes, therefore, that coordination of the Member States’ actions is, among others, an essential tool for reducing the mentioned negative impact; is of the opinion that if the EU cannot provide an adequate response to this current crisis, then both the euro area and the EU as a whole risk falling further behind with the realisation of the goals of environmental sustainability, competitiveness, productivity, fairness and macroeconomic stability; 15. Reiterates the importance of safeguarding the level playing field in the single market, while taking into account the physical characteristics faced by insular, peripheral, and sparsely populated regions of the EU and the situation of the EU’s least developed regions, which is a necessary precondition for fostering, among other things, the digital transformation and the green and just transitions, innovation and accelerating the recovery and competitiveness; 16. Calls for a better implementation of responsible public finances, socially balanced structural reforms improving long-term prospects and high-quality and efficient public and private investment, among others, to realise the green and digital transitions; 17. Is concerned about the impact of the pandemic containment measures on the low productivity growth in the EU and the pronounced decline of productivity growth in the euro area before the pandemic; is of the opinion that a balanced strategy to promote sustainable growth and an investment-friendly environment should be pursued, while improving fiscal sustainability; stresses that special emphasis should be placed on future-oriented investments and policies, especially by those Member States that have the fiscal space to invest in order to promote sustainable and inclusive growth; 18. Welcomes the European Green Deal as the EU’s new sustainable growth strategy bringing together four dimensions: the environment, productivity, stability and fairness, enabled by digital and green technologies, an innovative industrial base and strategic autonomy; III.Responsible fiscal and sustainable policies 19. Notes that although there are new challenges regarding macroeconomic stability, the Economic and Monetary Union is in a much better position to face crises than it was during the 2008 financial and economic crisis; is convinced that promoting resilient and sustainable economic recovery in line with the EU’s policy objectives, centred around the green, just and digital transitions, is one of the most important immediate priorities; notes that the means to overcome the current crisis are of a nature, which requires – for as long as necessary – expansionary fiscal policy; 20. Points out that those Member States that had fiscal buffers were able to mobilise fiscal stimulus packages at a much faster pace and without associated borrowing costs, which has helped to mitigate the negative socio-economic effects of the pandemic; reiterates that replenishing fiscal buffers over time, in a socially responsible manner, will be important for preparation for future crises; however, urges Member States, the Commission and the Council not to repeat mistakes of the past in response to the economic crisis; shares the view of the European Fiscal Board that rapidly reversing the fiscal stance is not advisable for recovery; 21. Notes the fact that the Commission intends to make recommendations on the budgetary situation of the Member States in 2021, as envisaged under the Stability and Growth Pact; points out that the economic governance framework should also look at current economic realities and be coherent with the EU’s policy priorities, while at the same time improving compliance with fiscal rules, which should be simplified, clear and practical, and are going to be reviewed, and according to the outcome, adapted; calls for a more pragmatic approach and underlines the need to ensure that the framework is stricter in good economic times and more flexible in bad economic times; 22. Without prejudice to the outcome of the discussions on the reform of the Growth and Stability Pact, highlights that the current EU fiscal and budgetary rules provide the flexibility needed in times of crisis, through the activation of the general escape clause under the Stability and Growth Pact and allow all Member States to adopt the fiscal stance necessary to protect the EU’s economies, thereby demonstrating extraordinary counter-cyclicality; 23. Expects that the general escape clause will remain activated as long as the underlying justification of the activation exists in order to support the efforts of the Member States to recover from the pandemic crisis and strengthen their competitiveness, as well as economic and social resilience; takes note of the Commission’s view that, according to the current preliminary indications, the general escape clause should continue to be applied in 2022 and be deactivated in 2023; invites the Commission to assess the deactivation or continued application of the general escape clause as part of its European Semester package on the basis of its spring 2021 economic forecast; notes that the Commission will continue to take into account country-specific situations after the deactivation of the general escape clause; 24. Takes note of the Commission communication on the fiscal policy response to COVID-19(11), which sets out its considerations on how to coordinate at EU level the conduct of fiscal policy, taking to the next phase the concerted approach of addressing the pandemic, sustaining the economy, supporting a sustainable recovery and maintaining fiscal sustainability in the medium term; ; acknowledges that the general escape clause allows Member States temporarily to depart from the adjustment path towards the medium-term budgetary objective, provided that this does not endanger fiscal sustainability in the medium term and does not lead to the suspension of the procedures of the Pact; takes note of the Commission’s assessment that sustainability risks have increased due to the severe impact of the crisis, and that this is likely to lead to less favourable growth and fiscal trajectories in the medium term; highlights the Commission’s call to make the best use of the general escape clause and Next Generation EU; 25. Calls on the Commission to act decisively in order to tackle tax fraud, tax avoidance and evasion, as well money laundering issues, which drain potential resources from national budgets and hampers governments’ capacity to act, among others, for the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic; 26. Notes the fact that, by the end of April 2021, the Commission intends to perform in-depth reviews assessing the state of play of imbalances for selected Member States; further notes that a number of existing macroeconomic imbalances are being aggravated by the COVID-19 crisis; 27. Recalls the urgent need to complete and reinforce the Economic and Monetary Union architecture by completing the Banking Union and the Capital Markets Union, with a view to protecting citizens and reducing pressure on public finances during external shocks so as to overcome social and economic imbalances; IV.Growth-enhancing, balanced and sustainable structural reforms 28. Is aware that the COVID-19 crisis will not be solved by the current fiscal stance alone; underlines, therefore, the importance of implementing deep, growth-enhancing, balanced and sustainable and socially just, tailor-made structural reforms to deliver on, among other things, sustainable and socially inclusive growth and jobs, which can support the recovery efficiently, as well as supporting the digital transformation and green transition, quality employment, reduction of poverty, and the UN SDGs, and can boost competitiveness and the single market, increasing convergence and stronger and sustainable growth within the Union and the Member States; points out that the long-term growth potential of Member States’ economies in particular can only be enhanced by structural improvements; notes, however, that the effectiveness and success of the alignment of Member States’ policy measures will depend on the review of the Stability and Growth Pact and, according to outcome thereof, its adaptation, as well as increased ownership by the Member States of the implementation of the country-specific recommendations; 29. Calls on the Commission to start working on the creation of a climate indicator to assess the discrepancy between the structure of Member States’ budgets and the Paris-aligned scenario for each of their national budgets; stresses the need for this indicator to provide Member States with information on their trajectory within the framework of the Paris Agreement in order to ensure that Europe is able to become the first climate-neutral continent by 2050; expects the climate indicator to be a reference for the EU’s various policies and thus also to be used as a guide for the European Semester, without watering down its original purpose; 30. Is of the opinion that developing digital skills is a precondition to ensure that all Europeans are able to participate in society and reap the advantages of the digital transition; points out that it requires reforms in the area of education, skills and also lifelong learning to steer a labour market in transition and to develop and enable key digital technologies and build Europe’s digital future; further points out that equality in cross-cutting access to digital infrastructure, equipment and skills should be supported in order to prevent a digital divide; 31. Calls on the Member States and the Commission, while respecting fiscal sustainability and sound budgetary rules, to create a regulatory and governance framework, including investment rules or other adequate mechanisms, that are predictable and supportive of public and private investments in line with the EU’s long-term objectives, while ensuring Member States’ ability to respond to future crises; 32. Takes note that the Member States are encouraged by the Commission, within the context of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, to submit their National Reform Programmes and their RRPs in a single integrated document; 33. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility, providing financial support, can be a unique opportunity to help Member States address their challenges identified in the framework of the European Semester; 34. Recalls that socially balanced, growth-friendly structural reforms do not always require fiscal space, but rather political, legislative and administrative efforts; 35. Highlights that continuous monitoring and vigilance will be needed and Member States should address emerging imbalances through reforms that enhance economic and social resilience and promote the digital transformation and green and just transitions; is pleased that the Commission will continue to monitor implementation by Member States of reforms proposed in previous years’ country-specific recommendations; considers that this process should take into account the economic and social outlook of the Member States; V.Investment 36. Stresses that the EU faces the unprecedented challenge of mitigating the economic consequences of the pandemic, taking into account EU strategies with a view to having a lasting impact on the resilience of the Member States, and believes that the economic recovery should be conducted through strengthening the single market, research and innovation, and in accordance with European Green Deal, the UN SDGs, the implementation of the EPSR and competitiveness, while alleviating the situation of SMEs and improving their access to private capital; is convinced that this requires both an increased level of economically, socially, environmentally and digitally viable investment in the long term and enhanced convergence and cohesion in the EU and the Member States; 37. Stresses the lack of investment, as projections reveal the need for an expansion of investment; highlights that public investments are limited, as they represent scarce resources mostly funded by the taxpayers; points out that the size of the investment gap also requires sizeable private and public investments, generating an adequate level of infrastructure, as well as a predictable and favourable business environment that is conducive to such investments; 38. Stresses that the Member States should focus on targeted, sustainable public and private investment in future-proof infrastructure and other areas that further strengthen the single market, the transition to a cleaner, socially inclusive, sustainable and digital society and increase the EU’s competitiveness and strategic autonomy; is of the opinion, therefore, that cross-border and multi-country projects are to be prioritised; 39. Underlines the need to adopt investment-friendly policies, reduce administrative burden and guarantee a level playing field, in particular for SMEs, which constitute the backbone of the EU economy and job creation; considers that all this would both facilitate economic recovery and create conditions advantageous to long-term growth; VI.A more democratic European Semester 40. Highlights the importance of full debate and the proper involvement of national parliaments and the European Parliament in the process of the European Semester; reiterates its call for the strengthening of the European Parliament’s democratic role in the economic governance framework, and calls on the Council and Commission to take due account of the resolutions adopted by parliaments; invites the Commission to keep both the European Parliament and the Council, as co-legislators, equally well informed on all aspects relating to the application of the EU economic governance framework, including on the preparatory stages; 41. Calls for committed coordination with social partners and other relevant stakeholders at both national and European level, with a view to strengthening democratic accountability and transparency; 42. Underlines the important role of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs in taking action with a view to improving accountability to Parliament, as the experience accumulated so far in applying the European Semester has shown that the current accountability set-up could be enhanced in order to improve its legitimacy and effectiveness; 43. Recalls that the European Semester is a mixed exercise consisting of the so‑called national and European semesters over the year; recalls the importance of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality; o 44. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| European Semester: employment and social aspects in the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the Commission communication of 17 September 2020 on the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021 (COM(2020)0575), – having regard to the Commission proposal of 18 November 2020 for a joint employment report from the Commission and the Council (COM(2020)0744), – having regard to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Economic Outlook, Volume 2020 Issue 2, of 1 December 2020, – having regard to the International Labour Organization (ILO) Global Wage Report 2020-21 of 2 December 2020 on wages and minimum wages in the time of COVID-19, and the ILO Monitors on COVID-19 and the world of work, – having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2017 on a European Pillar of Social Rights(1), – having regard to the Commission communication of 14 January 2020 entitled ‘A strong social Europe for just transitions’ (COM(2020)0014), – having regard to the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, – having regard to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs), in particular goals 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 and 13, – having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 on the European Green Deal (COM(2019)0640), – having regard to the Commission communication of 27 May 2020 entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ (COM(2020)0456), – having regard to the Recovery and Resilience Facility, – having regard to the Commission communication of 27 May 2020 entitled ‘The EU budget powering the recovery plan for Europe’ (COM(2020)0442), – having regard to its resolution of 16 November 2017 on combating inequalities as a lever to boost job creation and growth(2), – having regard to the Commission communication of 27 May 2020 entitled ‘Adjusted Commission Work Programme 2020’ (COM(2020)0440), – having regard to the Commission proposal of 28 May 2020 for a Council regulation establishing a European Union Recovery Instrument to support the recovery in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic (COM(2020)0441), – having regard to the Commission communication of 1 July 2020 on a European Skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience (COM(2020)0274), – having regard to the Commission communication of 19 February 2020 entitled ‘Shaping Europe’s digital future’ (COM(2020)0067), – having regard to Commission staff working document of 1 July 2020 accompanying the proposal for a Council recommendation on a Bridge to Jobs – reinforcing the Youth Guarantee (SWD(2020)0124), – having regard to its position of 10 July 2020 on the proposal for a Council decision on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States(3), – having regard to its position of 8 July 2020 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 as regards the resources for the specific allocation for the Youth Employment Initiative(4), – having regard to the Spring 2020 European Economic Forecast published by the Commission on 6 May 2020, – having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 18 September 2020 on decent minimum wages across Europe(5), – having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 16 July 2020 on the recovery plan for Europe and the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027(6), – having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘Common minimum standards in the field of unemployment insurance in EU Member States – a concrete step towards the effective implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights’(7), – having regard to the study by the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) of 24 June 2020 entitled ‘COVID-19: Policy responses across Europe’, – having regard to the Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2019-2024 entitled ‘A Union that Strives for More’, presented by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on 9 October 2019, – having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), proclaimed by the Council, the Commission and Parliament on 17 November 2017, – having regard to the Commission communication of 10 March 2020 entitled ‘A New Industrial Strategy for Europe’ (COM(2020)0102), – having regard to the OECD study of 15 June 2018 entitled ‘A Broken Social Elevator? How to Promote Social Mobility’, – having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/1158 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on work-life balance for parents and carers and repealing Council Directive 2010/18/EU(8), – having regard to its resolution of 26 May 2016 entitled ‘poverty: a gender perspective’(9), – having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 19 September 2018 on the digital gender gap(10), – having regard to Eurofound’s sixth European Working Conditions Survey – Overview report (2017 update), – having regard to the joint report of the Commission and Eurofound entitled ‘How computerisation is transforming jobs: evidence from Eurofound’s European Working Conditions Survey’, published in 2019, – having regard to the study of the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA) of 31 March 2020 entitled ‘Rethinking education in the digital age’, – having regard to its resolution of 15 November 2018 on care services in the EU for improved gender equality(11), – having regard to the Commission communication of 2 June 2016 on a European agenda for the collaborative economy (COM(2016)0356), – having regard to its resolution of 11 September 2018 on pathways for the reintegration of workers recovering from injury and illness into quality employment(12), – having regard to the debate with representatives of national parliaments on the priorities of the 2021 European Semester, – having regard to its resolution of 17 December 2020 on a strong social Europe for Just Transitions(13), – having regard to the joint report of the Commission and the OECD of 19 November 2020 entitled ‘Health at a Glance: Europe 2020 – State of Health in the EU cycle’, – having regard to the Commission staff working document of 20 February 2013 entitled ‘Investing in Health’ (SWD(2013)0043), – having regard to the Commission communication of 4 April 2014 on effective, accessible, and resilient health systems, (COM(2014)0215), – having regard to the opinion of the Commission’s Expert Panel on Effective Ways of Investing in Health of 25 November 2020 on the organisation of resilient health and social care following the COVID-19 pandemic, – having regard to the Council conclusions of 17 October 2019 on the Economy of Wellbeing, – having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Culture and Education, – having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A9-0026/2021), A. whereas according to Eurostat’s first estimation of annual growth for 2020(14), GDP fell 6,8 % in the euro area and 6,4 % in the EU; whereas according to the Commission’s winter 2020 European economic forecast, EU GDP will grow marginally by 1,4 % in 2021 and the GDP of the euro area will grow by 1,2 %, with the EU’s economic output barely returning to pre-pandemic levels in 2022; whereas private consumption growth is forecast to be moderate in 2022, largely due to lingering uncertainty about employment and income prospects, which are likely to keep precautionary savings at an elevated level; whereas, on the other hand, capital spending is set to benefit from highly accommodative monetary policies, increased public investment and targeted government support schemes for firms; whereas the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy (ASGS) did not consider the scenario of a third or further waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, which could exacerbate the current conditions of economic and social crisis to an even greater extent; B. whereas in some Member States, the EU funds and programmes provided for in the 2014-2020 multiannual financial framework (MFF) have not yet been fully implemented; whereas financing for the Next Generation EU (NGEU) recovery instrument, in particular the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), will only be available after the ratification of Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053(15) by the Member States; C. whereas the EU institutions have on multiple occasions recognised the need for actions addressing and tackling health inequalities and protecting people’s health during the current economic recession(16); D. whereas the COVID-19 outbreak has reversed the positive trend in the employment rate of the last six years in the EU-27, resulting in a reduction in the number of people in work of about 6,1 million in the second quarter of 2020 and a predicted decrease of 4,5 % over the year 2020(17); whereas according to Eurostat, in 2019, before the pandemic, 8,5 % of the EU population aged under 60 years lived in households where the adults had worked less than 20 % of the maximum weekly working hours during the past year and were facing worrying situations of in-work poverty(18); whereas precarious employment is still a significant concern that negatively affects labour markets; whereas workers who remain employed have faced a considerable reduction in hours worked and, consequently a loss of income, and whereas this development has the biggest impact on workers that belong to vulnerable groups; whereas it is of particular concern that in a forthcoming Eurofound report, the decline in employment headcount in the EU-27 during the first wave of the pandemic is shown to have been associated with a greater outflow to inactivity than to unemployment and a resulting weakening of labour market attachment(19); E. whereas the average number of hours worked is set to increase faster than headcount employment and employment may also fall further when short-time work schemes are discontinued; whereas the reallocation of workers is usually a lengthy process and employment is therefore expected to decline slightly in 2021; whereas, despite the expected economic rebound next year, the EU unemployment rate is set to rise further from 7,7 % in 2020 to 8,6 % in 2021 and it is expected to decline in 2022 to 8,0 %, with divergences between Members States that will persist(20); F. whereas investments that can lead to enhanced total factor productivity should be welcomed in the light of the mixed results to date, including the pre-pandemic slow pace of economic recovery and the increase in precarious employment; whereas the ongoing twin transitions, green and digital, will have important, but different, impacts on employment by sector, region and type of worker; whereas that will create new opportunities, as well as significant socio-economic challenges, in many regions and industrial sectors; whereas the EU needs a common strategy to accompany workers and businesses concerned in order to ensure that no one is left behind; whereas the COVID-19 crisis has accelerated those impacts, especially in labour markets trends, and will likely also affect demand for education, training and upskilling; whereas the COVID-19 outbreak caused significant changes in the practices of the labour market, with over a third of EU workers being required to work from home(21); whereas disconnecting from work should constitute an essential principle allowing workers to refrain from carrying out work-related tasks and engaging in electronic communication outside working hours without facing any repercussions, and thus to enjoy an adequate work-life balance; G. whereas before COVID-19, although there were differences between Member States, economic trends were generally described as positive in the European Semester annual reviews; whereas evidence shows that persistent and increasing inequalities remain among persons and between and within states and regions; whereas this leads to multiple divergences that need to be tackled with an intersectional approach in order to ensure equality of opportunities and a life of dignity for all groups; whereas while some regions facing more challenges in decarbonising their industries are to be targeted with financial support, like the Just Transition Fund, others that are too dependent on tourism and related services are not eligible for specific transition funds, despite some of them being the territories with the highest unemployment rates; whereas COVID-19-related support provided to workers and businesses varies greatly among the Member States; whereas global challenges such as digitalisation and the fight against climate change will persist, regardless of the COVID-19 crisis, and require a just transition so as not to leave anyone behind; H. whereas the COVID-19 crisis has led to a worsening of wage inequality around the world, only partly offset by state subsidies and minimum wage policies, leading to severe situations of precariousness and lack of protection; whereas lower paid workers, who are disproportionately women and young people, are the most affected by the socio-economic consequences of the crisis and the consequent rise in inequalities, while the stability of their work-life balance is already being challenged; I. whereas social protection systems vary between Member States and are under severe pressure to mitigate the social impact of the crisis, and ensure decent living conditions for all and access to essential services such as health, education and housing; whereas housing and childcare costs may force households into poverty and whereas it is important to take this into account when measuring in-work poverty and looking to integrate housing costs into standard indicators of social reporting; whereas in 2018, 9,6 % of the EU-27 population lived in households that spent 40 % or more of their equivalised disposable income on housing, although substantial differences between Member States were recorded; whereas in-work poverty in the EU has been increasing since the 2008 economic and financial crisis and it is estimated that 10 % of EU workers are at risk of poverty(22); J. whereas the youth unemployment rate has increased due to the COVID-19 crisis, reaching 17,1 % in September 2020, and is expected to continue rising; whereas 11,6 % of young people aged between 15 and 24 are not in education, employment or training (NEET)15; whereas the COVID-19 crisis has had an impact on access to education for disadvantaged social groups such as single-parent, low-income and large families, who have struggled to access or afford digital education equipment for their children; whereas increasing inequalities between generations affect the sustainability of our welfare system as well as our democratic health; whereas the economic fallout will have long-term negative effects on youth employment, and whereas young people might find themselves with fewer and/or lower-quality opportunities and poor working conditions; K. whereas women are particularly vulnerable to labour market changes owing to social care duties and uneven distribution of unpaid household and care work, discrimination on grounds of pregnancy and motherhood, occupational segregation and their more precarious employment; whereas an intersectional evaluation shows that women in vulnerable groups, such as young women with children and particularly single mothers, Roma women, women with disabilities or women of migrant origin, are more likely to be in a worse position(23); L. whereas the gender employment gap (11,4 %), gender pay gap (14 %) and gender pension gap (30 %) remain unacceptably high; whereas closing the gender employment gap is a social and economic imperative, due to the implications for women’s lives, including their financial security and quality of life, and its persisting economic costs, which amounted to around EUR 320 billion in 2018 (2,4 % of EU GDP)(24); whereas improving employment opportunities for women, ensuring equal pay, facilitating a good work-life balance, and adequately accounting for periods spent raising children in retirement pension schemes, including for men, are vital to sustainable social and economic growth and development and long-term fiscal sustainability in the EU; M. whereas people who are marginalised or suffer from social exclusion and poverty are facing particular challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic and whereas the labour market changes caused by it have disproportionately affected them; whereas the EU’s Roma population continues to face some of the worst socio-economic indicators, with over 80 % experiencing poverty and social exclusion, only 43 % in paid employment and disproportionately high NEET rates; whereas the Roma have been particularly badly hit by the COVID-19 crisis, not least in terms of access to education and training; N. whereas people with disabilities have faced even more limited access to services due to the pandemic; whereas the digital divide – including digital poverty, low digital literacy and difficulties with universal design – increases barriers to social rights for people with disabilities; whereas evidence gathered by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights demonstrated the significant obstacles in access to education faced by children with disabilities(25); O. whereas unemployment among temporary workers has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic; whereas one in five workers in the EU has a poor-quality job; whereas it is expected that in the next decade, job polarisation and non-standard forms of employment will increase further and there will be more jobs at the higher and lower ends of the skills spectrum(26); whereas technological change and the use of artificial intelligence might alter the labour market significantly; whereas this might lead to further disparities in earnings; whereas labour demand has consistently been weakest in the middle of the job-wage distribution, most noticeably during the period of recession and employment contraction that ran from 2008 to 2013(27); whereas this trend is likely to be further reinforced by the pandemic; whereas low-skilled jobs will always be essential for societies and must come with decent pay and conditions; whereas the labour market faces a rapid shift towards a greener and a more digital environment, creating jobs that require updated competencies, and whereas there is a considerable major need to focus on the training, reskilling and upskilling strategy for employees of all ages; whereas this has to be simultaneously combined with improving working conditions and creating new quality jobs for all; P. whereas sustainable development is a fundamental objective of the European Union and social sustainability is a fundamental prerequisite for fair and inclusive green, digital and demographic transitions; whereas the social market economy is based on two complementary pillars, namely the enforcement of competition and robust social policy measures, which should lead to the achievement of full employment and social progress; whereas the three pillars of sustainable development are the economic, the social and the environmental; whereas sustainable development is based, among other things, on full employment and social progress; whereas this is a fundamental objective of the European Union laid down in Article 3(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU); Q. whereas inequalities in health determined by socio-economic status were already substantial before the COVID-19 crisis; whereas gains in life expectancy in the EU have slowed and faltered; whereas the COVID-19 crisis has worsened physical and mental health outcomes, especially of the most vulnerable groups; R. whereas the impact of COVID-19 has been exacerbated by pre-existing inequalities that have been increasing over the past decade; whereas disinvestment in public services following the global financial crisis contributed to the widening of inequalities in relation to health needs; S. whereas new forms of employment that are expected to significantly transform the way of working in the future have emerged or intensified, such as teleworking and non-standard ways of working; whereas new realities have also emerged and existing trends have intensified during lockdowns, including the blurring of boundaries between work and private life, increased domestic violence, health problems among workers not only directly linked to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as musculoskeletal disorders and psychological troubles, as well as difficulties maintaining a good work-life balance in the new reality of work patterns and the necessity to combine work with care duties, and often home schooling; T. whereas the pandemic has exacerbated health and social inequalities(28) for wide-ranging groups including children in low-income families and older people, and whereas an increase in the poverty rate (more than 90 million citizens are currently at risk of poverty in the EU(29)), is predicted to be one of the side effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and is affecting new groups of citizens; whereas Eurofound suggests complementing the Social Scoreboard accompanying the EPSR with additional indicators such as job quality, social justice and equal opportunities, robust social welfare systems and fair mobility; U. whereas social dialogue is a crucial part of the EU social model as it helps to find tailor-made solutions for the labour market; whereas social dialogue has been weakened and collective bargaining coverage has fallen across the EU as a result of the decentralisation process that followed the 2008 crisis and labour market reforms introduced in some Member States, as pointed out in the European Semester country reports; whereas Eurofound has shown that the involvement of social partners in devising labour market policy responses to COVID-19 has been more limited than it would be in non-crisis situations in many Member States(30); V. whereas income inequalities remain at a high level in the EU; whereas tax and labour cost competition is harmful for the single market and for cohesion among the Member States; whereas well-designed progressive tax and benefit systems, social investment and the provision of quality public and social services are essential levers for preventing the transfer of disadvantage from one generation to the next; W. whereas the pandemic has greatly affected the educational system in the EU, leading to the closure of schools, universities and colleges; whereas the negative physical, mental health and educational impacts of proactive school closures on children will likely outweigh the benefits of decisions to close schools, in particular in areas with a population at risk of poverty or social exclusion; X. whereas the demographic challenge requires a comprehensive approach based on a mix of inclusive, non-discriminatory policy solutions in the fields of pensions, social security and protection, quality and accessible care services and infrastructure for children, the elderly and persons with disabilities, support to families, housing, early childhood education, long-term care, health systems, including preventative care and psychosocial support, the fight against poverty and social exclusion, the integration of migrants and work-life balance, gender equality, healthy and active ageing, high levels of employment and wages; whereas good working and living conditions throughout one’s lifetime are key to preventing care needs, and whereas adequate and affordable housing and high-quality local areas, including physical, social and service dimensions, are important, as they facilitate independent living; Y. whereas Eurofound has shown that the long-term care workforce has grown by one third over the past decade and is a key sector to consider, not only to guarantee quality of life for an ageing population, but also in terms of gender equality in three regards: currently most long-term care is provided by informal carers, most of whom are women; most workers in the sector are female and this has hardly changed; and most care receivers are women, who on average have a higher life expectancy than men in all Member States(31); Z. whereas we are facing a critical time in our history, with the idea that economic growth automatically trickles down to all sectors of society being widely discredited; whereas we are witnessing a thinning of the middle class, increasingly precarious job conditions and in-work poverty for blue collar, low-skilled and platform workers and growing polarisation in terms of income and wealth; whereas the cultural and creative sectors and the tourism sector, including events and performances, cultural tourism, intangible cultural heritage practices, alongside small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the self-employed, local and family businesses, have been severely affected economically by the measures meant to reduce the spread of COVID-19; AA. whereas the risk of poverty among people in non-standard forms of employment appears to have increased since the recession and this trend has been exacerbated by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic; AB. whereas, contrary to the crowding-out hypothesis that has prevailed in economic thinking for the last three decades, public investment and its crowding-in effects should play a central role in this new economic paradigm; whereas cohesion policy, as the EU’s main investment policy for social, economic and territorial development, has demonstrated its effectiveness in reducing inequalities and regional differences, in particular in the poorest regions; whereas social cohesion is a pre-condition for sustainable economic growth, job creation and employment; AC. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic and crisis has shown that fighting homelessness is a public health matter; whereas on any given night in the European Union, an estimated 700 000 homeless people have to sleep on the street or in shelters, a number that has increased by 70 % in the past 10 years; 1. Recalls that the Commission outlined, in the ASGS 2020 and the European Semester Spring and Summer Package 2020, that the European Semester should help to achieve the implementation of the European Green Deal, the EPSR and the UN SDGs; welcomes the inclusion of the EPSR and the UN SDGs in the ASGS 2021; urgently calls for fairness and social rights to be given the same importance as macro-economic objectives in a social and economic model that improves the well-being of people in the EU; emphasises the central role of the Social Scoreboard in the European Semester(32); 2. Notes the conclusion of the European Fiscal Board that the fiscal framework has to be revised in order to limit complexities and ambiguities, to offer better and more permanent protection for sustainable growth-enhancing government expenditure, and to set realistic targets for debt reduction in Member States that will not undermine upward social convergence; urges the Commission to ensure that all of the Member States’ socio-economic, macro-economic and fiscal policies contribute to and are fully consistent with the objectives and targets of the EPSR, the European Green Deal and the UN SDGs and that social and environmental targets and objectives are introduced in the framework of the multilateral surveillance procedure referred to in Article 121 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as well as in the context of a reinforced macro-economic imbalance procedure; considers that the inclusion of the UN SDGs and the social pillar within the scope of the European Semester will require the adjustment of existing indicators and the creation of new ones to monitor the implementation of EU economic, environmental and social policies, as well as coherence between policy goals and budgetary means; calls on the Commission to develop without delay a UN SDG expenditure tracking methodology for the EU budget that can also be used to assess national recovery and resilience plan (NRRP) investments; 3. States that 10 years after the introduction of the European Semester cycle of economic policy coordination, employment and social imbalances in the EU, such as labour market segmentation, wage dispersion, growing inequalities and poverty, especially child poverty, have not been resolved and have actually worsened, demonstrating that public policies in some Member States did not have enough leverage to build robust social protection systems and a fairer EU labour market, and that stronger policies and coordination at EU level are needed; strongly believes that EU support must go beyond making funds available; highlights the importance of taking lessons from the current health and economic crisis and acting proactively in the future; 4. Highlights that democratic accountability for the current Semester evaluation process needs to be strengthened; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reform the financial legal framework and the European Semester process in order to strengthen democratic accountability and the involvement of the European Parliament, to strengthen the role and participation of EU and national social partners, and to protect social progress objectives relating to social welfare systems and quality employment in future adjustment programmes and in the European Green Deal framework; 5. Emphasises that it should be better involved in the European Semester process, including the country-specific recommendations; stresses the important role of a more inclusive social dialogue with social partners, civil society, youth organisations, and local and regional authorities in shaping the European Semester; stresses that an effective, transparent, comprehensive, result-oriented and performance-based social tracking methodology – to be developed for the RRF – will improve the European Semester by better reflecting social, gender and environmental challenges and placing them on an equal footing with fiscal coordination, and by, for example, paying more attention to aggressive tax planning, poverty reduction, gender equality, social justice, social cohesion and upward convergence; 6. Believes that the Sustainable Semester Process has to focus equally on three dimensions: environmental sustainability, economic sustainability and social sustainability; reiterates that social sustainability can only be achieved through the reduction of inequalities and poverty and by offering social and employment opportunities and shared prosperity; stresses that social justice, decent work with living wages, equal opportunities, fair mobility and robust social welfare systems are essential elements in the just transition to a sustainable and social EU; calls on the Commission to carefully assess the dimensions of the Annual Sustainable Growth Survey to ensure they are fully in line with Article 3 TEU, which establishes sustainable development as the objective the EU has to work toward, based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment; calls on the Commission and the Member States to focus, together with the European Parliament, on addressing these challenges through EU eco-social policies combining shared economic prosperity, social progress and sustainable development; Social dimension within the Recovery and Resilience Facility 7. Welcomes the adoption of the RRF; acknowledges that the RRF will be linked to the European Semester process; underlines that the coordination between the two processes has to be transparent and must support the overarching EU objectives such as the implementation of the EPSR, the UN SDGs, the EU Gender Equality Strategy, the European Green Deal and the digital transition; highlights that the European Semester, including the principles of the EPSR, is the framework to identify national reform priorities and monitor their implementation; insists that reforms have to be based on solidarity, integration, social justice and a fair distribution of wealth, with the aim of creating quality employment and sustainable growth, ensuring equality of, and access to, opportunities and social protection, protecting vulnerable groups and improving the living standards of everyone in the EU; 8. Understands that Member States must include measures on social and territorial cohesion, children and young people in their national recovery plans in order to access the fund; notes that social milestones and targets have been neither explicitly defined nor earmarked in the RRF Regulation, but that, according to the adopted regulation, the Commission should set out the common indicators to be used for reporting on progress and for the purpose of monitoring and evaluating the facility, and should define a methodology for reporting social expenditure, including on children and young people, under the facility; points out the particular importance of indicators related to the implementation of the EPRS principles, quality employment, upward social convergence, equality of and access to opportunities and social protection, education and skills, and investment in access and opportunities for children and young people related to education, health, nutrition, jobs and housing, in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and Youth Guarantee; calls on the Commission to work with the European Parliament, social partners and civil society, in the context of the recovery and resilience dialogue, to define these indicators, in accordance with those established by the European Parliament resolution on a strong social Europe for just transitions, in order to assess the investments in and reforms of the NRRPs, as well as the proposed measures to ensure progress towards these goals; 9. Points out that Member States will design their own tailored NRRPs based on the criteria and six-pillar approach of the RRF and the investment and reform priorities identified as part of the European Semester process, in line with their national reform programmes, national climate and energy plans, Just Transition plans, Youth Guarantee implementation plans, and the partnership agreements and operational programmes set up for EU funds; recalls that each Member States must include in its NRRP a detailed explanation of how the plan contributes to the implementation of the EPSR, as well as how it strengthens quality job creation, upward social convergence, investments in young people and children, gender equality and equal opportunities for all; encourages the Member States to also include social targets and milestones and specify the estimated amount of investment in social progress towards them; insists that the NRRPs must contribute to achieving the UN SDGs, implementing the EU’s sustainable growth strategy as set out in the European Green Deal, and fulfilling the principles of the EPSR; calls on the Member States to make full use of the potential offered by the general escape clause to support companies which are in difficulty and are lacking liquidity, particularly by improving access for SMEs to public and private funding, safeguarding the jobs, wages and working conditions of people working in the EU and investing in people and social welfare systems; 10. Calls on the Commission to include the social indicators from the Social Scoreboard of the European Semester, in particular those related to decent work, social justice and equal opportunities, robust social welfare systems and fair mobility, in the common indicators to be used in the RRF for reporting on progress and monitoring and evaluating the plans, as well as in the methodology for reporting on social investment, including for the Child Guarantee and Youth Guarantee; stresses that the European Parliament will closely analyse the delegated act that the Commission will present on this matter, in order to establish if the social indicators, scoreboard and social methodology comply with the objectives, and to verify that there are no objections to be made; 11. Believes that robust welfare systems built on strong economic and social structures help Member States to respond more efficiently and in a fair and inclusive way to shocks and to recover more swiftly from them; highlights that social welfare systems contribute to guarantee that EU societies and everyone living in the EU have access to the integral services and economic support they need to lead a decent life, covering the following areas of intervention: social security, healthcare, education and culture, housing, employment, justice and social services for vulnerable groups; highlights furthermore that social welfare systems play a key role in achieving sustainable social development, combatting poverty and social exclusion, and promoting equality and social justice; warns that during the COVID-19 crisis, social welfare systems have been under unprecedented pressure, as they were not designed to cover the social demands triggered by a healthcare and economic emergency; calls on the Member States, with the EU’s support, to strengthen their social welfare systems so that they can perform well and assist the entire population, particularly in situations of crisis or systemic shocks, including by establishing targets for social investment that match digital and green investments in ambition; 12. Calls on the Commission and the Member States, in their recovery measures, to address the needs of children and take measures to ensure equitable access for all children to early years support, education on new technologies, skills and the ethical and safe use of digital tools, and opportunities for social, mental, cultural and physical wellbeing; calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious anti-poverty strategy and allocate a larger budget to the Child Guarantee; calls on the Commission to ensure that the upcoming Child Guarantee guarantees equal access for children to free healthcare, free education, free childcare, decent housing and adequate nutrition; 13. Believes that sustainable growth and fairness-enhancing reforms and investments outlined in the NRRPs must address structural weaknesses of social services and social protection systems and strengthen their resilience; reiterates the importance of the cohesion policy, which it understands to be a strategy to promote and support the ‘overall harmonious development’ of its Member States and regions, with the aim of strengthening economic and territorial development and social cohesion by reducing disparities within the EU, with a focus on the poorest regions; in this sense, points out that the reforms and investments in social and territorial cohesion should also contribute to fighting poverty and tackling unemployment, lead to the creation of high-quality and stable jobs and the inclusion and integration of disadvantaged groups, and enable the strengthening of social dialogue, entrepreneurship, social infrastructure, social protection and social welfare systems; 14. Believes that to ensure the EU remains resilient, we must focus all policies on ensuring a lasting recovery and avoiding the premature ending of measures and financial tools to support companies and workers, and strengthen them where and when needed; welcomes the activation of the general escape clause under the Stability and Growth Pact until at least the end of 2021; expects that it will remain activated for as long as the underlying justification for the activation exists; insists that any future adjustment programmes should focus on sustainable growth and quality job creation and be coherent and not hamper reforms or investments in social progress towards the social milestones and targets identified in the European Semester process and the NRRPs, in particular progress towards the reduction of poverty and inequalities; points out that financial support through the RRF will have to be ensured in order for Member States to achieve these social milestones and targets; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure sustainable investment and to support SMEs and their employees in the transition to a more digital and greener economy and the resumption of economic activity, and to give adequate consideration to SMEs by analysing the possible effects of fiscal consolidation policies on them, as SMEs are one of the main engines of the EU economy and vital for sustainable growth; 15. Believes that the economic governance framework must avoid procyclicality, which could result in increases in poverty and inequalities and a deviation from the social objectives agreed in the RRF; calls for the potential social negative consequences of the deactivation of the general escape clause to be evaluated in accordance with Article 9 TFEU; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in the context of the Recovery and Resilience Dialogue and the interinstitutional agreement on better law-making, to work together with the European Parliament in order to propose the necessary economic governance changes that will ensure social progress and protect the most vulnerable from bearing the consequences of any potential future adjustment programmes; 16. Acknowledges that the NGEU is substantial, but regrets that the limited size of the EU budget, together with its expenditure-driven nature and its principle of equilibrium, mean that its redistribution and stabilisation functions are also very limited; acknowledges the importance of social and cohesion policies, and looks forward to strengthening them if more needs arise; stresses that it is therefore all the more important to take full advantage of all possibilities under the MFF, the NGEU and the own resources system to support an inclusive national recovery, social justice, and environmental, economic, social and inclusive resilience, and to boost social policies and investments, while also strengthening the EU budget with a broader portfolio of own resources; 17. Believes that the NGEU, the MFF and the EU budget must dedicate investments to social objectives, and in particular social progress, as stipulated in Article 3 TEU and Article 9 TFEU, that match in ambition investments in the green and digital areas, and believes that the reduction of poverty and inequalities should also be a transversal consideration across all expenditure decisions; believes that the redistribution and stabilisation functions of the EU budget might need to be strengthened for a strong and inclusive recovery; calls on the Member States to take full advantage of all possibilities under the MFF, the NGEU and the own resources system to support social objectives and social justice in their national recoveries, in order to reinforce the social ambition in both the MFF and the RRF; calls on the Member States to accelerate the implementation of EU programmes and funds pursuant to the 2014-2020 MFF, and to urgently ratify Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053, and stresses that the implementation of the roadmap for the introduction of new own resources will be crucial to repaying the money spent under the EU recovery instrument without an undue reduction in EU expenditure or investment in employment and social policies under the 2021-2027 MFF; 18. Welcomes the inclusion within the European Semester of components referring to the specific activities in the education, culture, sport and media sectors carried out under the RRF; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the Member States’ progress reports on the implementation of the NRRPs within the European Semester exercise in order to verify to what extent the objectives of the RRF have been met; 19. Stresses that the ASGS 2021 mentions delivering on the EU objective of competitive sustainability, but that this concept is not defined as an objective in the EU Treaties and it is not featured in the UN SDGs; calls on the Commission, therefore, to deliver on the objectives defined in Article 3 TEU and Articles 8 to 11 TFEU, as well as to be more precise in the definition of resilience, understood to be an ability to not only withstand and cope with challenges, but also to undergo transitions in a sustainable, fair and democratic manner(33); 20. Highlights that social progress is one of the EU goals stipulated in Article 3(3) TEU; notes that the MFF agreement must properly address the serious social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for a robust response to invest in avoiding a further increase in unemployment, poverty and social exclusion, ensuring that no one is left behind; emphasises the need to make social progress an investment priority, together with the green and digital transitions, in order to protect everyone in our societies, particularly the most vulnerable, against the negative impact of the current crisis and to mitigate the widening of inequalities; recalls that the Commission estimates the investment needed in social infrastructure to be EUR 192 billion, with health and long-term care accounting for 62 % (EUR 57 billion for affordable housing, EUR 70 billion for health, EUR 50 billion for long-term care, and EUR 15 billion for education and life-long learning)(34); reiterates the importance of projects that generate positive social impacts and enhance social inclusion; recalls that social progress plans must be included in NRRPs and outline the implementation of the EPSR and social investment in order to reduce the investment gap in social infrastructure; stresses the role of the European Parliament as co-legislator and calls for its input to be taken into account to ensure democratic monitoring in the recovery and resilience plans; calls on the Member States to put in place mechanisms that guarantee dialogue with regional social partners; 21. Calls on the Member States to increase their gross domestic product allocations for education and to make, in their NRRPs, ambitious investment in all levels of education – including vocational and educational training, upskilling and reskilling – a condition for an economic recovery that fosters social cohesion and tackles inequalities; Social dimension 22. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to actively tackle the digital divide in access to public services, many of which have been digitalised during the COVID-19 pandemic, by ensuring EU support, including financial support, for social innovation at local level aiming to make public services more easily accessible, including capacity-building and the scaling up of innovative bottom-up initiatives for e-inclusion and data literacy, so as to ensure that everyone in the EU has access to high-quality, accessible and user-friendly services of general interest; stresses the importance of further improving digital skills and promoting the digital transformation of businesses and public administrations; underlines that the digitalisation of public services can help to facilitate fair labour mobility, particularly with regard to the coordination of social security systems, and calls on the Member States to commit to this digitalisation; stresses that the Members States should also focus on innovation and investments in improved connectivity and infrastructure for urban and rural households and along major transport corridors; 23. Calls on the Member States to take the measures needed to reinforce their digital infrastructure, their connectivity and the educational methods used in their schools, universities and learning centres, to accelerate reforms implementing the digital transformation, thus ensuring that everyone in the EU can benefit, and to make a particular effort to ensure that online education is accessible to all; recalls, in this context, the need to adequately train teachers, trainers and parents, who all play a crucial role in the digital transformation, especially with regard to new formats such as distance and blended learning; points out the need to thoroughly assess the impact of overexposure to the digital world and calls for measures that promote better understanding of the risks posed by digital technologies, which may affect children and young people in particular; stresses that, in the long term, access to digital and online education is not to be intended to act as a replacement, but rather as a complement to the direct interaction between teachers and learners, as only in-person learning can effectively ensure the acquisition of interpersonal and social skills; 24. Stresses the need for the Commission and the Member States to collect better and more harmonised data on the number of homeless people in the EU, as this constitutes the basis of any effective public policy; 25. Stresses that investment in social rights is important, as is the effort to mainstream the principles enshrined in the EPSR, taking due account of different socio-economic environments, the diversity of national systems and the role of social partners; 26. Is concerned about the large amounts of tax revenue that are not collected due to large-scale tax avoidance; calls on the Council to speed up the negotiations on legislation regarding public country-by-country reporting and a common consolidated corporate tax base, and to revise the criteria for both the Code of Conduct Group for Business Taxation and the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions; 27. Calls on the Commission and the Council to do their utmost to fight tax evasion and tax avoidance and effectively counter harmful tax practices adopted by some Member States; 28. Regrets that the way data is presented in the joint employment report is not clear and that the data is often inconclusive or difficult to compare, regarding the evolution of wages, productivity, capital gains and profits, subsidies and tax breaks for corporations, and the tax wedge for labour and capital; warns that multifactor productivity is not being measured; calls on the Member States to include the Gender Equality Index as one of the European Semester’s tools and to analyse the structural reforms from a gender perspective; recalls that to understand new demands, behaviours and responses, better gathering, monitoring and use of existing and new forms of data and evidence is needed; is concerned about the lack of references to combatting discrimination and racism and to ensuring equality of opportunity and a life of dignity for all groups, including of children and in terms of their access to education; calls on the Commission to strengthen the implementation of anti-discrimination legislation, policy and practice in order to effectively counter discrimination on all grounds, including antigypsyism, and preserve social, mental, cultural and physical well-being in the recovery measures; 29. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop a sustainable quality employment package, taking into account diverse forms of national practices and the role of social partners and collective bargaining, including legislative initiatives aimed not only at improving wages but also at ensuring decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, work-life balance, mental well-being at work, parental and care-related leave, occupational health and safety, the rights of platform workers, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening democracy at work and the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; stresses that creating quality employment is one of the objectives included in the RRF Regulation and that this should be done through a comprehensive package of reforms and investments as well as measures ensuring stable contracts, decent wages, collective bargaining coverage and social protection floors, including decent pensions above the poverty threshold; calls on the Commission to include these indicators in the guidelines for assessing social progress under the NRRPs; points out that labour market reforms undertaken as part of the NRRPs must be in line with the attainment of these objectives; 30. Notes that macroeconomic policies that ensure high levels of quality employment, as well as fair taxation, are essential for the sustainability of our national pension systems in a demographic context of ageing Member State populations; stresses the need for further support for workers and businesses as the Member States continue to strive for macroeconomic stability in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis; calls for a coordinated approach at EU level in order to avoid unfair and unhealthy labour cost competition and increase upward social convergence for all; 31. Stresses that social dialogue and collective bargaining are key instruments that help employers and trade unions to establish fair wages and working conditions, and that strong collective bargaining systems increase the resilience of the Member States in times of economic crisis; firmly believes that a democratic, resilient and socially just recovery should be based on social dialogue, including collective bargaining; reiterates its view that the Member States should take measures to promote high trade union density and reverse the decline in collective bargaining coverage; points out the importance of ensuring that workers in the EU are protected by adequate minimum wages, by law or collective agreements, ensuring they have a decent standard of living wherever they work; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s proposal for a directive on adequate minimum wages in the European Union, which aims to increase collective bargaining coverage and ensure that workers in the European Union are protected by minimum wages set at adequate levels; 32. Calls on the Member States to take measures to promote effective access to social protection systems in order to ensure adequate social protection floors for all workers (in particular vulnerable workers such as those in non-standard forms of work, the self-employed, migrants and those with disabilities), in particular by following the Council Recommendation of 8 November 2019 on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed(35); welcomes, once again, the adoption of this recommendation as a first measure and the Commission’s commitment to strengthening social protection systems in the EU, but stresses the need to make universal access to social protection a reality, especially in the current difficult situation; calls on the Member States to develop and strengthen incentives to increase employment opportunities for older workers, while concurrently ensuring the adequacy and sustainability of pension systems; 33. Calls on the Commission to give priority to the publication of its strategy on the rights of people with disabilities and urges the Member States to keep in mind and work on compensating the disproportionate negative effects that measures adopted in the context of the pandemic have on vulnerable groups; 34. Recalls that the COVID-19 crisis has put Member States’ public health systems under unprecedented stress, which underlines the importance of adequate financing, notably by making best use of the RRF to enhance crisis-preparedness capacity and strengthen social and institutional resilience, as well as the importance of capacity, accessibility, effectiveness and quality of public health and sufficiently staffed healthcare systems, including to accelerate the coordinated distribution of and timely access to vaccines for all Member States and to all people; welcomes the building of a strong EU Health Union in this regard; calls on the Member States to ensure equal and universal access to high-quality healthcare, including preventive, long-term care and health promotion, with a special focus on quality care for the elderly, notably by making dedicated investments in the field and ending precariousness and the abuse of temporary work in the health sector; 35. Stresses that tackling the pandemic is a prerequisite for the social and economic recovery and for the effectiveness of the recovery efforts; welcomes the development of COVID-19 vaccines, but is very worried about the serious cases of non-compliance with production and delivery schedules; calls for COVID-19 vaccines to be treated in practice as public goods that are guaranteed for all; calls on the Commission and the Member States to overcome the barriers and restrictions arising from patents and intellectual property rights in order to ensure the widespread production of vaccines and their timely distribution to all countries and to all people; 36. Recalls that the employment gap, the gender pay gap and the gender pension gap remain extremely high; underlines that the European Semester process and the RRF should contribute to tackling these challenges; calls for gender equality to be strengthened through the integration of gender mainstreaming, and for the Commission to accelerate the introduction of an effective, transparent, comprehensive, result-oriented and performance-based methodology for all EU programmes; welcomes the Commission’s intention to introduce binding pay transparency measures, including a male-female wage equality index; urges the swift adoption of these measures in order to avoid further gender-based inequalities; calls on the Member States and the Commission to support entrepreneurship among women and facilitate access to financing for them; calls on the Member States to unblock the negotiations on the Women on Boards Directive in the Council; 37. Calls on the Commission to expand the country-specific recommendations in the future to include an outcome regarding the involvement of social partners in wage-setting mechanisms and the effectiveness of their involvement; 38. Stresses that the timely, effective and equitable implementation of the EU skills agenda is critical for promoting employment in the health sector and tackling skills shortages in new fields of work; warns, however, that a skills agenda is not enough to tackle the increasing precariousness and in-work poverty in the EU labour market; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that high-quality, affordable and inclusive skills and vocational training are developed through the obtaining and mutual recognition of qualifications and the recognition and validation of competencies, learning outcomes and diplomas at all education levels, as well as of non-formal learning with tailored support and active outreach, notably for the most marginalised groups in society, thus avoiding stereotyping; emphasises the need to encourage lifelong learning practices across the EU, as they will prove an essential element for the transition towards a digital, green, competitive and resilient EU economy; 39. Recalls the importance of EU programmes such as the Youth Guarantee, whose package has recently been strengthened; calls on the Member States to quickly implement this programme, in close alignment with EU funds such as the European Social Fund Plus, to address their NEET situation, with particular concern for those living in rural areas and regions with natural or demographic constraints in their labour markets, in order to ensure that all young people under the age of 30 receive a good-quality offer of employment, continued education, vocational education or training, are able to develop the skills needed for employment opportunities in a wide range of sectors, or are offered a remunerated apprenticeship or traineeship within four months of becoming unemployed or leaving formal education; 40. Encourages the Member States to temporarily adapt the EU School Fruit, Vegetables and Milk Scheme to the closure of schools, when closures are required to fight the pandemic, in order to ensure that children maintain healthy eating habits during such periods, to prevent malnutrition among those at risk of poverty and social exclusion, and to support local producers; 41. Highlights the importance of horizontal coordination between EU programmes and national measures for social justice and equality, social development, combating the risk of poverty and social exclusion, including child poverty and in-work poverty, and preventing the emergence of skills shortages and income inequalities; points out that the European Social Fund is a prime example of the aforementioned horizontal coordination; strongly underlines, at the same time, that the social and employment impact should be a transversal consideration across all expenditure programmes; 42. Emphasises that the EU budget’s backstop, its borrowing and lending functions, and in particular the EU instrument for temporary Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE scheme), are perfect examples of how the credit capacity and reputation of the EU budget can be used to support Member State actions in line with EU priorities, particularly in the exceptional circumstances created by a health and economic crisis that was unprecedented in the history of the EU; 43. Calls for better coordination between environmental, economic and social policies and between the different recovery funds and structural funds, in order to improve synergies and boost social investment resources, including those aimed at first respondents to the crisis such as essential workers, embedding the principle of leaving no one behind; calls on the Commission and the Member States to involve all relevant national, regional and local authorities, at their appropriate levels, in the design and implementation of European-Semester-related actions, in particular in the health and social fields, which often fall outside of economic and fiscal considerations; 44. Welcomes the inclusion of housing affordability in the European Semester; calls on the Commission to propose an EU framework for national homelessness strategies, and further calls on the Member States to adopt the principle of housing first, which helps to substantially reduce the rate of homelessness, prioritising the provision of permanent housing to homeless people, proposing ways to tackle energy poverty, stopping forced evictions and stopping the criminalisation of homelessness; stresses, moreover, the need to collect better and more harmonised data on homeless people in the EU; calls on the Commission and the Member States to come up with specific proposals to adequately address the problem of energy poverty in the context of the European Green Deal; 45. Calls on the Commission to present an instrument to mitigate the effects of asymmetric shocks that is effective in the long run, such as an adequate and workable unemployment (re)insurance scheme that would be able to back up national schemes when a part of the EU experiences a temporary economic shock; stresses the paramount importance of supporting investment and access to finance in the EU in order to help SMEs with solvency difficulties, create quality employment in strategic sectors and promote territorial, economic and social cohesion in the EU; highlights the fact that the new European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for displaced workers could be mobilised to mitigate the consequences of the COVID-19 crisis on employment; calls, therefore, on the Member States to rapidly submit to the Commission applications for funding to support EU workers who have lost their jobs as a result of COVID-19 to retrain, requalify and reintegrate into the labour market; 46. Welcomes the fact that the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund is also being used to respond to this pandemic, by supporting the restructuring needs of EU companies; notes that the limit on worker dismissals for access to the fund has been reduced to the minimum of 200, and that this EU tool could help to fund personalised support measures, such as tailor-made training courses and re-skilling and up-skilling programmes; calls on the EU institutions involved to be flexible and quickly analyse the activation requests, ensuring that the time needed to mobilise the fund is reduced to a minimum; 47. Stresses that the brain drain phenomenon widens the economic and social development gap within the EU; calls on the Commission to assess brain drains in certain regions and sectors and propose support measures where needed, as well as to support mobile workers by ensuring freedom of movement of workers, without restrictions, and strengthening the portability of rights and entitlements; asks the Commission to put forward a proposal for a digital EU social security number; 48. Notes the need to provide specific support for the media sector, which plays a key role in our democracies, in a way that respects and promotes media freedom and pluralism at a time when the online environment is increasingly dominated by a few large players, with increasing market power and mobile tax bases, sometimes hampering the ability of many smaller EU companies to start up and scale up across the single market, as highlighted in the Commission communication on the EU Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 2021(36); draws the attention of the Member States to the specific measures set out in the Commission Media Action Plan unveiled on 3 December 2020 to help the broadcasting, news publishing and cinema sectors to recover from the big loss in advertising revenues experienced due to the lockdown imposed by the pandemic and to boost their production and distribution of digital content; 49. Points out that fairness conditions should be considered for companies that wish to access public funds and support in order to avoid such support going to companies based in a jurisdiction referred to in Annex I to the Council conclusions on the revised EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes(37), and points out that they should not subvert collective bargaining, workers’ participation or co-determination in company decision-making processes in accordance with national law and practice, and should be conditional on maintaining the same level of working and employment conditions and rights, including protection against dismissals and reductions in wages, with no bonuses or dividends paid to managers or shareholders respectively; 50. Stresses that the assessment of the rule of law and the effectiveness of the justice system should thus continue to be included in the European Semester; o 51. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Situation in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and the assassination of the Italian ambassador Luca Attanasio and his entourage |
| |||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to its previous resolutions on the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), notably that of 18 January 2018(1) of the same title and that of 17 September 2020 on the case of Dr Denis Mukwege in the DRC(2), – having regard to the statement by spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General of 22 February 2021 on the DRC, – having regard to the statement of 20 May 2020 by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) on the security situation in Ituri, – having regard to UN Security Council resolutions, in particular Resolution 2463 of 29 March 2019 on the extension of the mandate of the UN Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) until 20 December 2019, – having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/2033 of 10 December 2020 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the DRC(3), – having regard to the measures laid down in UN Security Council Resolution 2528 of 25 June 2020 on the renewal of measures on the arms embargo against the DRC imposed by Security Council resolution 2293 (2016) until 1 July 2021 and the extension of the mandate of the Group of Experts established pursuant to Resolution 1533 (2004) until 1 August 2021, which renewed until 1 July 2021 a series of sanctions such as an arms embargo on armed groups in the DRC, a travel ban on individuals and an asset freeze on individuals and entities designated by the Sanctions Committee, – having regard to the UN Report of August 2010 of the Mapping Exercise documenting the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the DRC between March 1993 and June 2003, – having regard to the report from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and MONUSCO of 6 July 2020 entitled ‘violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by the Allied Democratic Forces armed group and by members of the defense and security forces in Beni territory, North Kivu province and Irumu and Mambasa territories, Ituri province, between 1 January 2019 and 31 January 2020’, – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas (Conflict Minerals Regulation)(4), – having regard to the Partnership Agreement of 23 June 2000 between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part (the Cotonou Agreement)(5), – having regard to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which was adopted on 27 June 1981 and entered into force on 21 October 1986, – having regard to the Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Congo, which was adopted on 18 February 2006, – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, – having regard to the Charter of the United Nations, – having regard to Rule 144(5) and 132(4) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas on 22 February 2021 Luca Attanasio, Italian ambassador to the DRC, his driver Mustapha Milambo, and Vittorio Iacovacci, an Italian military police officer, were killed by gunmen during an attack on their convoy; whereas the ambassador and his staff were travelling in a UN vehicle from Goma to visit a UN World Food Programme (WFP) school project in Rutshuru; whereas the route was on a road previously designated safe for travel without a security team; B. whereas park rangers from Virunga National Park attempted to save the lives of the ambassador and his entourage; whereas rangers themselves work under the constant threat of kidnapping and killings by rebel groups; whereas six rangers were killed and a seventh injured in an attack in January 2021 in Nyamitwitwi; whereas 12 rangers and five civilians were killed in an ambush in April 2020; C. whereas the grave security situation in eastern DRC continues to deteriorate, in particular on the border between Ituri, South Kivu and North Kivu; whereas approximately 120 armed groups, including the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, the Allied Democratic Forces, and the Nduma-Defence of Congo-Rénové, operate in the region, vying for access to and control of natural resources, including minerals, and have been responsible for kidnappings, killings, torture and sexual violence; D. whereas the violence in eastern DRC claimed more than 2 000 victims in 2020; whereas the violence has increased even more since the beginning of 2021; whereas civilians, of whom the majority are women and children, are targets of the repeated violence, which resulted in the deaths of more than 150 people between 11 December 2020 and 10 January 2021; whereas within the first two months of 2021, more than 100 people were kidnapped and many others were injured; whereas medical infrastructure and natural resources were destroyed, and houses were reportedly set on fire; whereas the humanitarian consequences of this violence are a cause for concern; whereas, to date, the UN has registered more than 67 000 displaced persons; E. whereas, according to the Kivu Security Tracker, 152 civilian killings, 61 kidnappings for ransom and 34 cases of abduction have been reported in both North and South Kivu since 1 January 2021; F. whereas on 12 March 2017, armed men executed two UN investigators – Zaida Catalán, a Swede, Michael Sharp, an American – and their interpreter Beitu Tshintela while they were documenting human rights abuses in the central Kasai region of the DRC; G. whereas the DRC has one of the highest rates of internal displacement in the world; whereas more than five million people have been uprooted due to insecurity within the country’s borders; whereas many women and children live in precarious conditions, sleeping outside or in overcrowded public spaces and being exposed to the risk of harassment, assault or sexual exploitation; whereas displaced populations often receive no basic life-saving services and are at risk of malnutrition and disease; whereas as of 4 February 2021, an Ebola outbreak has been declared in North Kivu province; H. whereas the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has reported increasing numbers of kidnappings and attacks on aid workers and convoys, which have forced humanitarian organisations to postpone the delivery of aid and suspend their activities; whereas members of civil society, including activists, journalists and human rights defenders, continue to face harassment, intimidation and attacks; whereas many of them risk their lives to defend the freedoms of association and expression; I. whereas MONUSCO’s mandate expires on 20 December 2021 and whereas the DRC sanctions regime established under UN Resolution 1533 expires on 1 July 2021; whereas the number of troops and budget allocated to MONUSCO continue to be reduced; J. whereas in December 2020, the EU renewed the targeted sanctions in place against eleven DRC officials responsible for human rights abuses; K. whereas the UN Mapping Exercise Report published in 2010 documented 617 corroborated serious human rights violations in eastern DRC between 1993 and 2003; whereas the report detailed a series of recommendations, which have largely not been implemented; whereas impunity remains a serious problem; 1. Condemns in the strongest terms the killing of Luca Attanasio, Moustapha Milambo and Vittorio Iacovacci, expressing its deepest sympathy to the families of the victims, the Government of Italy and to WFP national staff; deplores the loss of life and killings of innocent civilians; 2. Calls for a thorough, independent and transparent investigation into the circumstances surrounding the murders to be conducted; welcomes the President Tshisekedi’s commitment to launching an inquiry and urges the DRC Government and provincial leaders to cooperate fully with the Italian authorities and the United Nations; 3. Stresses that it is the primary responsibility of the DRC Government to ensure security in its territory and protect its populations while maintaining respect for the rule of law, human rights and international humanitarian law, including protection from crimes against humanity and war crimes; 4. Firmly insists that the DRC authorities must step up their efforts to end armed attacks on civilians and that they must thoroughly, independently, effectively and impartially investigate all killings and bring those responsible to justice in fair trials; 5. Strongly condemns the serious violations of human rights and humanitarian law committed by local militias in eastern DRC; urges the DRC Government to establish a mechanism for justice and accountability for those responsible for the human rights violations documented in the UN Mapping Exercise Report, as well as for other crimes committed in the DRC that are considered serious under international law and international humanitarian law; 6. Urges President Félix Tshisekedi to uphold his commitment to ensuring that those responsible for the murders of UN investigators Zaida Catalán and Michael Sharp and their interpreter Betu Tshintela are held accountable, and calls for full transparency in this investigation; 7. Is concerned by the persistence of serious human rights abuses and international humanitarian law violations against civilians in eastern DRC, including summary executions, sexual and gender-based violence, and the large-scale recruitment and use of children by armed groups. as well as the killing of civilians by members of the DRC security forces; stresses that these acts could constitute war crimes under international law; deplores the continual threat of violence experienced by the local population, humanitarian and development workers, international organisations, the diplomatic community, and human rights defenders operating in eastern DRC; 8. Is extremely concerned at the continuing levels of impunity in the country; notes that the failure to address impunity for those committing human rights violations only perpetuates further abuses; urges the DRC authorities to swiftly bring to justice the perpetrators of the attack of 22 February 2021 and to take serious steps towards achieving transitional justice; 9. Reiterates its call for the recommendations of the UN Mapping Exercise Report to be taken forward, notably the recommendation on creating specialised mixed chambers in DRC courts to allow for cooperation between the DRC judiciary and the international community on prosecuting human rights abuses; calls for the strengthening of the national justice sector as a whole in order to prosecute crimes that have caused serious human rights violations; 10. Condemns the human rights violations and violations of international humanitarian law committed by security and defence forces; urges the DRC authorities to remove from their positions security force officers and other executive branch officials who have been reported by the UN and DRC and international human rights organisations as having been implicated in serious human rights violations; calls for the creation of a formal vetting mechanism as part of the broader security sector reform efforts, in order to ensure that that the most suitable candidates are hired and that security forces act in a manner consistent with international human rights and international humanitarian law standards; calls on the authorities to end all support by security force officers and political leaders to armed groups and ensure that those responsible for such support are held accountable in fair trials; 11. Calls on the DRC Government to adopt a zero-tolerance approach to collaboration between political leaders, the armed forces and the police, and armed groups; 12. Calls on the DRC authorities to urgently set up an effective demobilisation, disarmament, and reintegration (DDR) programme and strategy for dealing with armed groups, with long-term support to prevent former fighters from returning; urges the DRC authorities to provide critical humanitarian assistance to hundreds of demobilised fighters currently stationed in DDR camps with hardly any food supplies and no access to adequate medical care; 13. Stresses the determination of MONUSCO to continue to do its utmost to ensure the protection of civilians in accordance with its mandate and to support national efforts to consolidate peace and stability in the country; notes that its role should be reaffirmed through a clear mandate in which benchmarks related to the security situation must be reached before its possible withdrawal from the region; 14. Recalls that the violence in eastern DRC is strongly linked to the raw material trade; emphasises that any business, individual or state or state-related actor contributing to the perpetration of such crimes must be brought to justice; welcomes the entry into force of the Conflict Minerals Regulation in January 2021; stresses that this regulation maintains the DRC on the list of countries considered conflict-affected and high-risk; notes that the biggest challenge remains artisanal gold, the management of which is a source of instability in the region; stresses the urgent need for further action on mandatory due diligence and responsible business conduct by businesses operating in conflict zones; 15. Stresses the need to undertake further efforts to cut off financing for armed groups involved in destabilising activities through the illicit trade of natural resources, including gold or wildlife products; 16. Expresses its deep concerns over the security and humanitarian situation, especially the recent surge in the number of internally displaced persons in the DRC, which continues to severely affect the civilian population; recalls its deep concern regarding the ongoing military activities of foreign and domestic armed groups and the smuggling of DRC natural resources; calls for all international investors, including China, to fully comply with international law, standards and best practices in responsible mining; 17. Condemns the killings of Virunga Park ecoguards during the attacks carried out in 2020; urges the DRC Government to disarm rebels and restore security in the park region; 18. Welcomes the UN Security Council publication of 14 January 2021 entitled ‘United Nations Strategy for Peace Consolidation, Conflict Prevention and Conflict Resolution in the Great Lakes region’; urges the parties involved to continue cross-border cooperation, including through the UN Office of the Special Envoy for the Great Lakes, to address the violence, human rights abuses and impunity in eastern DRC; 19. Calls on the DRC Government to ensure better governance at all levels of the state and society, including public finance and the fight against corruption; calls for the EU sanction mechanism be used to fight against corruption; stresses the importance of organising a credible electoral process in 2023 and to guarantee sustainable security in eastern DRC; 20. Calls on the VP/HR, the EU delegation to and the EU missions in the DRC to increase the visibility of their support to human rights defenders at risk in the DRC using all available tools (i.e. political, diplomatic and financial), as a protective measure to provide recognition for their human rights work and acknowledge their important role as human rights defenders fighting for stability and peace in the region, and where appropriate, to facilitate the issuing of emergencies visas, and provide temporary shelter in the Member States; 21. Calls on the European Union to step up funding for the DRC in order to address the severe underfunding of the UN agencies working with local authorities and communities to protect civilians; 22. Strongly underlines the need for cross-border cooperation in the African Great Lakes region and the establishment of a regional strategy by neighbouring countries to address the violence and human rights abuses in the DRC; calls for the common security and defence policy mission in the African Great Lakes region to contribute to the stabilisation of the security conditions and the improvement of the humanitarian situation; 23. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the EU Special Representative for Human Rights, the ACP-EU Council of Ministers and Joint Parliamentary Assembly, the President, Prime Minister and Parliament of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the African Union and its institutions.
| ||||||||||||||||||
| The human rights situation in the Kingdom of Bahrain, in particular the cases of death row inmates and human rights defenders |
| |||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to its previous resolutions on Bahrain, in particular those of 14 June 2018 on the human rights situation in Bahrain, notably the case of Nabeel Rajab(1), and of 16 February 2017 on executions in Kuwait and Bahrain(2), – having regard to the statements by the spokesperson of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) of 13 July 2020 on upholding death sentences in Bahrain, of 10 June 2020 on the release of human rights defender Nabeel Rajab, of 9 January 2020 on the confirmation of the death sentence for two Bahraini citizens, and of 27 July 2019 on the executions of Ali al-Arab and Ahmed al-Malali, – having regard to the statement of 12 February 2020 by Agnes Callamard, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Fionnuala Ni Aolain, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, and Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, urging Bahrain to quash the death sentences against Mohammed Ramadan and Husain Moosa, – having regard to the joint statement of 10 October 2019 by VP/HR Federica Mogherini, on behalf of the EU, and the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, Marija Pejčinović Burić, on the European and World Day Against the Death Penalty, – having regard to the European Union Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, on the Death Penalty, on Torture, on Human Rights Dialogues with third countries and on Freedom of Expression, – having regard to the EU Strategic Framework and Action Plan on Human Rights, which aims to place the promotion, respect and fulfilment of human rights at the heart of all EU policies, – having regard to the conclusions of the 25th EU-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Joint Council and Ministerial Meeting of 18 July 2016, – having regard to the EU-Bahrain Cooperation Arrangement, – having regard to the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights and to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to which Bahrain is party, – having regard to the November 2011 report by the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI), – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in particular Article 3 thereof, – having regard to the Arab Charter on Human Rights, – having regard to Rule 144(5) and 132(4) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas in the aftermath of the 2011 popular uprising, the Bahraini authorities continue to violate and restrict the rights and freedoms of the population, in particular the right of individuals to peaceful protest, freedom of expression and digital freedom both online and offline; whereas human rights lawyers, journalists and political activists face ongoing systematic targeting, harassment, detention, torture, intimidation, travel bans and revocation of citizenship; whereas since 2011 the authorities have rejected all demands by the democratic opposition and human rights defenders for the freedoms of speech and assembly to be respected; whereas no political opposition is tolerated in Bahrain; whereas the authorities have arrested several children for joining protests in February 2021, and have reportedly subjected them to threats of rape and electrocution; whereas at least three of them remain in detention as of 4 March 2021, including a 16-year-old with a serious medical condition; B. whereas human rights defender Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, a Bahraini and Danish citizen, the co-founder of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights and the Gulf Center for Human Rights, is currently completing his tenth year in prison while serving a life sentence on charges of ‘financing and participating in terrorism to overthrow the government and spying for a foreign country’; whereas following Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja’s arrest, he was beaten, tortured and sentenced in an unfair trial that did not comply with Bahraini criminal law or international fair trial standards; whereas in July 2012, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that Al-Khawaja’s arrest was arbitrary, as it resulted from his exercise of the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, and called for his release; C. whereas Nabeel Rajab, one of the most prominent Bahraini human rights defenders, was released from prison on 9 June 2020 to serve the rest of his five-year sentence under the alternative sanctions law; D. whereas between 2011 and 2020, Bahrain sentenced to death approximately 50 people, in contrast to the seven death sentences handed down between 2001 and 2010; whereas 27 persons are currently on death row in Bahrain, of whom 26 are at imminent risk of execution; whereas on 15 January 2017 Bahrain ended a seven-year de facto moratorium on the death penalty by executing three civilians; whereas six people have been executed since then; whereas these executions were declared extrajudicial killings by the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; whereas the death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, and violates the right to life enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; whereas the conditions on death row inflict extreme psychological suffering; E. whereas independent observers report that in the majority of recent executions, Bahraini authorities have extracted confessions through torture, and defendants have not been guaranteed fair trials; whereas since the 2011 protests and following the conclusions of the BICI report on government abuses, a number of internal bodies, such as the Office of the Ombudsman within the Ministry of the Interior, a Special Investigations Unit (SIU) within the Office of the General Prosecutor, and the Prisoners and Detainees Rights Commission (PDRC), have been set up, but are not effective and independent enough; whereas the lack of independence of these bodies has reportedly caused a lack of accountability within the Bahraini Government and security forces; whereas this has fostered a culture of impunity that undermines democratic reform attempts and serves to further destabilise the country; F. whereas Ali Al-Arab and Ahmed Al-Malili, both Bahraini citizens convicted of terrorism offences in a mass trial marred by allegations of torture and serious due process violations, were executed by firing squad on 27 July 2019; whereas on 18 February 2014 Mohamed Ramadan was arrested by the Bahraini authorities for allegedly taking part – along with Hussein Ali Moosa – in a bomb attack in Al Dair on 14 February 2014; whereas, on appeal, on 13 July 2020 the Court of Cassation reaffirmed its final ruling and upheld the death sentences imposed on Mohamed Ramadan and Hussein Ali Moosa, despite an unfair trial with a verdict based on confessions allegedly coerced from defendants under torture, and the outcomes of the Special Investigation Unit’s investigation into Moosa and Ramadan’s torture allegations; whereas Agnes Callamard, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, warned that Moosa and Ramadan’s conviction and death sentence would be arbitrary and a clear violation of their right to life and would amount to arbitrary killing; whereas UN human rights experts have called on Bahrain to prevent the execution of both men; whereas Mohamed Ramadan and Hussein Ali Moosa are at imminent risk of execution and have exhausted all legal remedies; G. whereas the Bahraini authorities dissolved al-Wefaq, the country’s largest peaceful political opposition party, confiscated its assets and arrested its leaders; whereas the leader of the party, Shaikh Ali Salman, is currently serving a life term in jail on alleged espionage charges; H. whereas several public figures have been prosecuted merely for their social media activity, including prominent lawyers Abdullah Al Shamlawi and Abdullah Hashim; whereas no independent media have operated in Bahrain since the Information Affairs Ministry suspended Al Wasat, the country’s only independent newspaper, in 2017; I. whereas health and hygiene conditions in Bahrain’s overcrowded prisons remain extremely serious; whereas Bahrain released 1 486 prisoners in March 2020 owing to the health risk posed by the COVID-19 pandemic; whereas the releases have mostly excluded opposition leaders, activists, journalists and human rights defenders; whereas Bahraini authorities are denying prisoners urgent medical attention, risking their health and wellbeing, in violation of the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners; whereas numerous political prisoners have gone on strike to protest poor treatment in custody; J. whereas the Bahraini courts continue to issue and uphold decisions to strip citizens of their nationality; whereas more than 300 people in 2018 and more than 100 people in 2019, including human rights defenders, politicians, journalists and senior religious authorities, among others, had their citizenship revoked by Bahraini Courts and in most cases remain stateless; whereas revocation of nationality is being used in contravention of Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; K. whereas in December 2018, Bahrain amended its labour law to prohibit employers from discriminating against workers on the basis of sex, origin, language or creed; whereas it adopted sanctions against sexual harassment at work; whereas Bahrain continues to be a place where migrant workers, especially women hired as domestic workers, are exploited due to the Kafala system which allows for exploitation; L. whereas Bahraini law continues to discriminate against women in family law, such as in the right to divorce and transmission of Bahraini nationality to their children on an equal basis to men; whereas Bahrain acceded to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 2002, but maintains reservations to several articles which contain provisions that are central to the purpose of the convention; whereas Article 353 of the criminal code exempts perpetrators of rape from prosecution and punishment if they marry their victims; whereas Bahrain’s Parliament proposed a full repeal of that article in 2016, but the cabinet rejected the proposal; whereas Article 334 of the criminal code reduces the penalties for perpetrators of so-called honour crimes and adultery, and whereas sexual relations outside marriage are still criminalised; M. whereas Bahrain is an important EU partner in the Persian Gulf, including in political and economic relations, energy and security; whereas the Kingdom of Bahrain has a rich history of long-standing openness to other cultures from around the world, and is an active player in creating momentum for building confidence and fostering dialogue and stability in the Gulf and wider Middle East region; N. whereas the change in leadership in November 2020 and the appointment of the new Prime Minister Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa presents Bahrain with an opportunity to move towards political reform and national inclusive reconciliation, including Sunni-Shia reconciliation; whereas the EU-Bahrain Human Rights Dialogue was held in February 2021; whereas Bahrain is the second country in the Gulf region with whom the EU has established a Human Rights Dialogue; 1. Is deeply concerned that ten years after the Bahraini ‘Arab Spring’ uprising, the human rights situation in the country continues to worsen, with the application of the death penalty, arbitrary arrests, prosecution and harassment of human rights defenders, and denial of civil and political rights and freedoms of association, assembly, and expression both online and offline; 2. Strongly condemns the sentencing to death of Mohammed Ramadan and Husain Ali Moosa; urges the Bahraini authorities, and in particular His Majesty Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, to halt their execution immediately, commute their sentences, order a retrial that fully complies with international fair trial standards and excludes evidence obtained under torture, and allow an independent investigation into the torture allegations; calls on Bahrain to review the independence and effectiveness of internal bodies monitoring governmental abuses such as the Ombudsman, the Special Investigations Unit (SIU) and the Prisoners and Detainees Rights Commission (PDRC) that are conducting inadequate investigations and whitewashing the Bahraini court’s reliance on forced confessions to secure convictions, including in the investigation into the allegations of Mr Ramadhan and Mr Moosa; 3. Strongly deplores the lifting of the de facto moratorium on the use of the death penalty; calls on the Bahraini authorities to introduce an immediate moratorium on the use of the death penalty as a step towards its abolition; calls for a comprehensive review of all death sentences to ensure that these trials adhered to international standards and that victims of human rights abuses unlawfully sentenced to death receive redress; recalls that the EU opposes capital punishment and considers it to be a cruel and inhuman punishment which fails to act as a deterrent to criminal behaviour and is irreversible in the event of error; 4. Highlights that the change in leadership since November 2020 presents an opportunity for the EU to refocus its foreign policy towards Bahrain, including in the light of the new National Action Plan for Human Rights; calls on the new Prime Minister, Prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, to use his authority to move Bahrain towards political reform, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; 5. Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all human rights defenders and prisoners of conscience, including Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, Dr Abduljalil al-Singace, Naji Fateel, Abdulwahab Hussain, Ali Hajee, Sheikh Ali Salman and Hassan Mshaima, who have been detained and sentenced for merely exercising their right to freedom of expression, and to drop all charges against them; calls on the VP/HR and the Member States to champion and pursue a vigorous campaign to secure the immediate release of the imprisoned human rights defenders, as a key element for enhanced EU-Bahrain cooperation; calls on the Bahraini authorities to guarantee a safe space for civil society organisations and independent media; urges the Government of Bahrain to allow foreign journalists and human rights organisations access to Bahrain; strongly commends the work of all human rights defenders, journalists and lawyers whose work is essential for the defence of human rights; urges the Government of Bahrain to reinstate the country’s single independent media outlet, Al Wasat, and to allow independent political societies to operate in Bahrain, including those dissolved; 6. Welcomes the release of Nabeel Rajab under the alternative sanctions law, but urges the Bahraini authorities to lift his travel ban; 7. Calls on the Bahraini Government to stop the harassment of human rights defenders and to immediately lift the travel ban on them, and insists that authorities guarantee in all circumstances that human rights defenders in Bahrain are able to carry out their legitimate human rights activities, both inside and outside the country; 8. Expresses particular concern about the misuse of anti-terrorism laws in Bahrain, and stresses the importance of the support given to Bahrain, in particular as regards its judicial system, with a view to ensuring compliance with international human rights standards; asks the authorities of Bahrain to promptly amend its Act No. 58 (2006) on protecting society from acts of terrorism and all other laws that limit freedom of expression and political freedoms, and which are not fully compliant with international obligations and standards; 9. Condemns the continuing use of torture, including denial of medical care, and other cruel and degrading treatment or punishment of detainees, including peaceful protesters and civilians; calls for thorough and credible investigations into all torture allegations with a view to holding those responsible to account; deplores the dire prison conditions in the country; urges the Bahraini authorities to protect all detainees from the danger of COVID-19; 10. Urges the Government of Bahrain to abide by its obligations and commitments under the UN Convention against Torture, including its Article 15, which prohibits the use of any statement made as a result of torture as evidence in any proceedings; calls for the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture (OPCAT) and of the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death penalty; 11. Calls on the Government of Bahrain to fully cooperate with UN bodies, to extend a standing invitation to visit Bahrain to all Special Procedures of the UN Human Rights Council, and to cooperate in a proactive manner; calls on the Bahraini Government to allow EU officials, independent monitors and human rights groups to visit Bahraini prisons, and urges the Bahraini authorities to ensure in particular that the UN Special Rapporteurs on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, on Human Rights Defenders, on Freedom of Expression and on Freedom of Assembly are allowed to enter the country; 12. Condemns the ongoing practice of arbitrarily stripping nationals of their citizenship, which has in many cases resulted in people being left stateless in violation of the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness; calls on the Bahraini authorities to amend the country’s citizenship law and to restore Bahraini citizenship to those individuals who have been unfairly stripped of it; 13. Notes the Government of Bahrain’s ongoing efforts to reform the country’s criminal code and legal procedures, and encourages them to continue this process; calls for the full implementation of the recommendations of the BICI and the Universal Periodic Review (UPR); continues to support the Government of Bahrain’s reform agenda, and encourages the Kingdom of Bahrain to aim for stability through further reforms and inclusive reconciliation in an environment where peaceful political grievances can be expressed freely, in line with its international obligations; 14. Calls on the EU Delegation to fully implement the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, to provide all appropriate support to the human rights defenders detained, including through arranging prison visits, trial monitoring and public statements, and to offer support to civil society and access to protection for people at risk of persecution; 15. Calls on the VP/HR, the European External Action Service (EEAS), the Council and Member States to systematically raise concerns about human rights violations in Bahrain, as well as the lack of political space for expressing legitimate and peaceful dissent, and to consider targeted measures against those responsible for serious human rights violations; 16. Notes the human rights dialogue between the EU and Bahrain; calls for reinforcement of the dialogue in accordance with the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Dialogues; notes that an EU-Bahrain human rights dialogue is no substitute for a proper dialogue between government, opposition and civil society in Bahrain itself; urges the EEAS to ensure that the informal human rights dialogue with Bahrain is geared to concrete deliverables and commitments, including the consultation of civil society before and after the dialogue; emphasises that Bahraini authorities should meaningfully and genuinely engage in this process; supports further dialogue, engagement and the sharing of best practices on human rights and judicial procedures between the EU, its Member States and the Kingdom of Bahrain; 17. Urges the EU to ensure that human rights are mainstreamed across all areas of cooperation with Bahrain, including in the EU-Bahrain Cooperation Agreement, which was recently concluded and did not include references to human rights; 18. Is disturbed at the reports of the use of surveillance technology against Bahraini human rights defenders; reiterates that surveillance technologies exported by European companies to Bahrain could facilitate the repression of human right defenders; emphasises the need for the EU export control authorities to take human rights criteria into account before granting export licences to a third country; calls on all the Member States to strictly observe the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports, and in particular to halt all transfers of weapons, surveillance and intelligence equipment and material that can be used by Bahrain in its ongoing crackdown on human rights; 19. Stresses that the EU Delegation’s Chaillot Prize for the Promotion of Human Rights in the Gulf Cooperation Council Region should not be awarded to those justifying human rights violations; 20. Expresses its alarm at the fact that the Kafala system enables violations of labour rights and restrictions against social and trade union movements in the country; urges the Bahraini Government to amend labour legislation to ensure that domestic workers are able to benefit from the same rights as other workers, including limits on their working hours, weekly rest days and a minimum wage; 21. Calls on the Bahraini Government to amend legislation as necessary to eliminate discrimination against women related to entering marriage, within marriage, during the dissolution of marriages, and in relation to children and inheritance, and to allow women to pass on nationality to their children on the same basis as men; urges the Bahraini Government to lift all reservations to the CEDAW, to repeal Articles 353 and 334 of the Criminal Code which condone violence against women, and to repeal provisions that criminalise consensual adult sexual relations; 22. Urges the EEAS, the Commission and Member States to remain vigilant with regard to developments in the country and in the Gulf region in general, and to use all means of influence at their disposal; deplores foreign interference in Bahrain’s domestic politics aimed at destabilising the country; 23. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice‑President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Government and Parliament of the Kingdom of Bahrain, and the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council.
| ||||||||||||
| The mass trials against opposition and civil society in Cambodia |
| |||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to its previous resolutions on Cambodia, in particular those of 14 September 2017 on Cambodia, notably the case of Kem Sokha(1), 14 December 2017 on Cambodia: notably the dissolution of CNRP Party(2) and 13 September 2018 on Cambodia, notably the case of Kem Sokha(3), – having regard to the Council conclusions on Cambodia of 26 February 2018, – having regard to the 1991 Paris Peace Accords, in which a commitment to uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms in Cambodia, including on the part of international signatories, is enshrined in Article 15, – having regard to the Commission’s decision of 12 February 2020(4) to withdraw part of the tariff preferences granted to Cambodia under the European Union’s Everything But Arms (EBA) trade scheme as of 12 August 2020, – having regard to the statement by the spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights of 11 September 2020 on the arrest of the prominent trade unionist Rong Chhun and 24 other human rights and environmental defenders(5), – having regard of the statement by the spokesperson of the European External Action Service (EEAS) of 2 March 2021 on the mass trials conducted against opposition figures, – having regard to the International Labour Organization Convention on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, – having regard to the statement by the Special Rapporteur on the rights of peaceful assembly and association, the Members of the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls and the Special Rapporteur on the freedom of opinion and expression of 16 November 2020 on the crackdown on civil society and attacks on human rights defenders in Cambodia, – having regard to the Cooperation Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Cambodia of 29 April 1997(6), – having regard of the Cambodian Criminal Code, – having regard to the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders of 2008, – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948, – having regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, – having regard to the statement of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, Rhona Smith, of 25 November 2020, – having regard to Rules 144(5) and 132(4) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas in November 2020 at least 137 individuals were accused of being linked to the dissolved opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) to stand trial for politically motivated charges of incitement, plotting and attacks against the state under Articles 451, 453, 494 and 495 of the Criminal Code; B. whereas on 1 March 2021, the Phnom Penh Municipal Court convicted the nine most senior leaders of the CNRP on charges of ‘attempting to organise a coup d’état to overthrow the government’ in relation to their attempted return to Cambodia on 9 November 2019; C. whereas theformer CNRP president Sam Rainsy attempted to return to Cambodia in 2019; whereas Mr Rainsy was handed down the harshest sentence of 25 years imprisonment; whereas Mu Sochua, Eng Chhay Eang, Ou Chanrith, Ho Vann, Long Ry, Men Sothavrin, Tiolung Saumura and Nuth Romduol were sentenced alongside Sam Rainsy; whereas all defendants face prison sentences of between 20 and 25 years ; whereas their right to vote and stand for election has been revoked; D. whereas the opposition politicians were tried in absentia, as they were not allowed to return to Cambodia to defend themselves in court; E. whereas, while these cases are being expedited by the courts, the trial against the former president of the CNRP, Kem Sokha, who was released on restrictive bail, remains suspended and his petitions for a resumption of the proceedings have been rejected; F. whereas in July 2019 the court convicted in absentia Kong Atith, the newly elected president of the Coalition of Cambodian Apparel Workers Democratic Union (CCAWDU), of intentional acts of violence in relation to a 2016 protest between drivers and the Capitol Bus Company; whereas as a result of his three-year suspended sentence, Mr Kong Atith can no longer work as the leader of a worker’s union; G. whereas on 31 July 2020, the authorities arrested Rong Chhun, president of the independent Cambodian Confederation of Unions, without an arrest warrant at his home in Phnom Penh, and whereas on 1 August 2020, he was charged with ‘incitement to commit a felony’ under Articles 494 and 495 of Cambodia’s Criminal Code; whereas he was subsequently placed in pre-trial detention at Phnom Penh’s Correctional Centre 1; H. whereas throughout the mass trials conducted from November 2020 to February 2021, no reliable evidence was presented; whereas the defendants were not allowed to be present during the trials; whereas the public was largely excluded from the legal proceedings; whereas there have been reports of defendants objecting to the alleged confessions used during the trial, arguing that these were signed or thumb-printed under duress and without legal representation present; I. whereas the trials staged by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court violate the procedural and substantive requirements of a fair trial reflected in the Cambodian Criminal Code and Article 14(3)(d) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; J. whereas since 2017 the Government of Cambodia has undertaken a series of repressive actions curtailing political participation and electoral rights in the country, moving away from the path towards democracy and creating an authoritarian state; K. whereas on 16 November 2017, the Supreme Court announced the dissolution of the CNRP; L. whereas the 2018 elections in Cambodia failed to meet the minimum international standards for democratic elections and allowed the ruling party, the Cambodian People’s Party (CPP), to take full control of all seats, both in the Senate and in the National Assembly, thereby de facto creating a one-party state with no parliamentary opposition; M. whereas the Cambodian authorities have announced that the next local elections will take place on 5 June 2022, while the key opposition party CNRP remains legally dissolved and its leaders convicted and banned from participating in politics, with its supporters being harassed, arrested and subjected to violence; N. whereas UN human rights experts have expressed concerns about the tightening of restrictions on civil society in Cambodia; O. whereas on 12 February 2020, the Commission decided to withdraw part of the tariff preferences granted to Cambodia under the European Union’s Everything But Arms (EBA) trade scheme owing to the serious and systematic violations of the human rights principles enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; 1. Calls on the Government of Cambodia to put an end to all forms of harassment, intimidation and politically motivated criminal charges against members of the opposition, trade unionists, human rights defenders, the media and civil society actors; calls on the security forces to refrain from unnecessary and excessive force against those engaged in peaceful protests; 2. Calls on the Cambodian authorities to proceed with the immediate and unconditional annulment of the sentences against Sam Rainsy, Mu Sochua, Eng Chhay Eang, Ou Chanrith, Ho Vann, Long Ry, Men Sothavrin, Tiolung Saumura and Nuth Romduol; 3. Calls on the Cambodian authorities to initiate a process of national reconciliation through genuine and inclusive dialogue with the political opposition parties and civil society; 4. Calls on the Government of Cambodia to release, without delay, all persons who have been detained for exercising their human rights, and to drop all charges against them; emphasises that the charges brought against the more than 130 persons targeted are politically motivated and aimed at eradicating any dissent; 5. Is appalled by and condemns the escalating violations of human rights in Cambodia, including violence against peaceful protesters, the adoption of new repressive laws and the arrest of human rights defenders, journalists, opposition party activists, environmentalists, students and ordinary citizens for peacefully expressing their opinions; 6. Urges the Cambodian Government to repeal all repressive laws, including the recent decrees and draft laws regulating the digital environment and enabling the government to increase online surveillance, censorship and control of the internet, as well as to repeal all recent amendments to the Constitution, the Criminal Code, the Law on Political Parties, the Trade Union Law, the Law on NGOs and all other pieces of legislation limiting freedom of speech and political freedoms, and which are not fully in line with Cambodia’s obligations and international standards; 7. Calls on the Cambodian authorities to respect the rights of all citizens to a fair trial, freedom of expression and freedom of association and peaceful assembly; 8. Calls on the Cambodian authorities to immediately cease other forms of harassment, including judicial harassment and intimidation of opposition members in the country; 9. Condemns repressive action under the guise of protecting health and recalls that emergency measures in the framework of containing the COVID-19 pandemic should not be used simply to quash dissent; 10. Expresses its concern about the increasing crackdown on environmental activists; is alarmed by their inclusion in the recent mass trials; 11. Reiterates that the elections were neither free nor fair and the CPP should not be considered the legitimate ruling party of Cambodia; emphasises that elections can only be truly free and fair if the opposition parties are allowed to participate; 12. Calls on the Cambodian Government to restore democracy and ensure that the application of the law respects human rights and fundamental freedoms, which includes fully complying with the constitutional provisions on pluralism and freedom of association and expression; 13. Expresses serious concern about continuous governmental measures and acts of harassment against independent media outlets and journalists that stifle their rights to freedom of expression, including their right to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority, and expresses alarm at the imprisonment on trumped-up charges of several journalists for independent reporting; 14. Regrets the fact that the Cambodian Government failed to meet its responsibility in overcoming serious and systematic violations of political participation, freedom of expression and freedom of association, which led to the Commission’s decision to withdraw part of the tariff preferences granted to Cambodia under the European Union’s EBA trade scheme as of 12 August 2020; urges the Commission to insist on clearly defined human rights benchmarks in all its interactions with the Cambodian Government, and to include the issues of concern highlighted in this resolution as part of its ongoing enhanced engagement with the authorities, including on EBA; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the situation, and to assess the effect of the partial EBA withdrawal on the most vulnerable segments of civil society; 15. Notes that this year’s Asia-Europe Meeting Summit is scheduled to take place in Phnom Penh; believes that the EU should not accept this location unless democracy is restored; 16. Calls on the Member States to suspend all bilateral financial support to the Cambodian Government and instead focus on civil society organisations and opposition parties; 17. Calls on the EEAS and the Member States to monitor the human rights situation in Cambodia and act in full compliance with the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy and the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders; asks the EU Delegation in Phnom Penh and the embassies of the Member States to monitor trials and conduct prison visits; 18. Insists that the Cambodian Government cooperate with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and UN Special Procedures in order to allow them to fulfil their mandates without interference; 19. Calls on the Cambodian Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the dissolution of the CNRP is swiftly reversed and its 5 007 local councillors reinstated; 20. Reiterates the call on the Cambodian authorities by Rhona Smith, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, to open up civic space, protect and promote fundamental freedoms, including the rights to assembly and of expression, and to ensure the right to a fair trial for all, as guaranteed by international human rights norms and standards and Cambodian laws; 21. Urges the Commission and the Council to draw up a comprehensive and strategic democracy initiative with regard to the countries of the ASEAN region and to present it to the European Parliament within six months; 22. Believes that targeted sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes, against Cambodian leaders and their economic interests are overdue; urges the Council to adopt restrictive measures against the political leaders and leaders of the security forces responsible for serious human rights violations, the dissolution and subsequent repression of the opposition in Cambodia, and against their economic interests under the EU global human rights sanctions regime; 23. Calls on the EEAS and the Member States to take urgent action to lead the efforts at the forthcoming 48th session of the UN Human Rights Council towards the adoption of a strong resolution addressing the human rights situation in Cambodia, extending the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, and requesting that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights monitor and report on the situation of human rights in Cambodia and outline actions the government should take to comply with its international human rights obligations; 24. Calls on the European Council to adopt a formal position on the human rights situation and deterioration of democracy in Cambodia; 25. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the European External Action Service, the Secretary-General of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the Government and National Assembly of Cambodia.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| The Syrian conflict - 10 years after the uprising |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to its previous resolutions on Syria, in particular that of 15 March 2018 on the situation in Syria(1), of 18 May 2017 on the EU strategy on Syria(2), of 4 July 2017 on addressing human rights violations in the context of war crimes, and crimes against humanity, including genocide(3), of 24 October 2019 on the Turkish military operation in north-east Syria and its consequences(4), of 26 November 2019 on children rights on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child(5) and of 17 November 2011 on EU support for the International Criminal Court(6), – having regard to the statement of the EU Foreign Affairs Council of 6 March 2020, and the latest EU Council conclusions on Syria of 14 October 2019, 16 April 2018 and 3 April 2017, – having regard to the previous statements on Syria by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, including those of February 2020 on humanitarian access in Idlib, of 13 January 2020 and 26 September 2019 on Syria, and of 9 October 2019 on developments in north-east Syria, – having regard to Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2021/30 of 15 January 2021 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria(7), which added the new Syrian Foreign Affairs Minister to the EU list of sanctions against those responsible for violent repression in Syria, – having regard to the EU strategy on Syria adopted on 3 April 2017, and to the Council conclusions on the EU regional strategy for Syria and Iraq as well as the ISIL/Daesh threat adopted on 16 March 2015, – having regard to the joint declaration by the UN and the European Union, as co-chairs of the fourth Brussels Conference on Supporting the Future of Syria and the Region, held on 30 June 2020, – having regard to the previous statements of the UN Secretary-General on Syria, including those of his spokesperson of 1 and 18 February 2020, – having regard to the latest statement of the UN Special Envoy to Syria, Geir O. Pedersen, addressed to the UN Security Council (UNSC) on 22 January 2021, – having regard to the UNSC resolutions relevant to Syria since 2011, in particular UNSC Resolution 2254 (2015) endorsing a road map for a peace process in Syria, UNSC Resolution 2249 (2015) on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and UNSC Resolution 2533 (2020) renewing the Bab al-Hawa border crossing until 10 July 2021 for humanitarian aid, – having regard to the latest reports of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, submitted to the UNHRC on 1 March 2021, – having regard to UN General Assembly Resolution 71/248 of 21 December 2016 establishing the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Persons Responsible for the Most Serious Crimes under International Law Committed in Syria since March 2011, – having regard to the statement by Unicef of 28 February 2021 on the safe reintegration and repatriation of all children in Al-Hol camp and across the north-east of Syria and to the Unicef Whole of Syria Humanitarian Situation Report 2020 of 2 February 2021, – having regard to the establishment in 2011 of the Secretariat of the EU Genocide Network for investigation and prosecution of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, hosted by Eurojust, – having regard to Council Common Position 2003/444/CFSP of 16 June 2003 on the International Criminal Court(8), to its 2004 Action Plan for the International Criminal Court (ICC) to achieve universal ratification and implementation, and to the revised EU Action Plan of 2011, – having regard to the Rome Statute of the ICC, – having regard to the UN Charter and UN conventions to which Syria is a state party, including the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, – having regard to the UN-backed Geneva Communiqués of 2012 and 2014, – having regard to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the additional protocols thereto, – having regard to the UN Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction, – having regard to the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 9 December 1948, – having regard to Rule 132(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas in late February 2011 Syrian children were arrested, detained and tortured in Deraa by the Syrian regime for writing graffiti critical of President Bashar Al-Assad on city walls; whereas on 15 March 2011 thousands of Syrians in Deraa and Damascus took to the streets in record numbers to demand democratic reforms, the release of political detainees, an end to torture, respect for human rights and the rule of law, the holding of free and fair elections, and an end to corruption; whereas these popular protests spread across the country for several years, from major cities such as Homs, Hama, Idlib and popular neighbourhoods of Aleppo and Damascus, to smaller towns such as Al-Hasakah in the north-east and Kafr Nabl in the north-west; B. whereas the Syrian uprising of 2011 was a demonstration of Syria’s ethnic and religious diversity, including leaders from all ethnic and religious groups and all provinces of the country; C. whereas the Syrian regime responded to the legitimate democratic aspirations of its people with sheer brutality from the Syrian security forces and allied militias under its command; whereas more than 500 000 people have lost their lives and more than one million have been injured; whereas according to the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR), since March 2011 over 230 000 civilians have been killed, 88 % of whom by the Syrian regime, 3 % by Russian forces, 2 % by Daesh and 2 % by armed opposition groups; whereas over 15 000 civilians have been tortured to death, 99 % of whom in regime prisons; whereas over 150 000 civilians have since been forcibly disappeared and remain detained, 88 % of whom by the Syrian regime, 6 % by ISIL/Daesh and 3 % by armed opposition groups; whereas over 3 400 healthcare staff have since been forcibly disappeared or detained, 98 % of whom by the Syrian regime; D. whereas the parties to the conflict, including government forces and their allies, anti-government armed groups and UN-listed terrorist organisations such as ISIL/Daesh, have perpetrated gross human rights violations to various degrees, including war crimes and crimes against humanity; whereas the tactics deployed by both the brutal regime and jihadists were directed at the annihilation of moderate and pro-democratic forces; whereas all those responsible for these crimes must be held accountable; E. whereas the Syrian regime has used chemical weapons, Scud missiles, conventional artillery and air-dropped bombs, as well as barrel bombs, cluster bombs and incendiary bombs, on densely populated civilian neighbourhoods such as Homs, Hama and East Aleppo; whereas peaceful protesters who were injured by live fire from Syrian security forces were denied treatment and tortured to death in military hospitals and detention centres across the country, as evidenced by the Caesar report presented by France to the UNSC in May 2014; whereas families have been routinely prevented from burying their dead in cemeteries; whereas entire cities have been under siege and deliberately starved; whereas collective punishments, extrajudicial killings and multiple massacres of hundreds of men, women and children in rural towns, such as in May 2012 in Houla, have taken place; whereas the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria reported on the systematic use of rape and other forms of sexual violence as a weapon of war by Syrian regime forces and their militias; F. whereas the UN has established a series of initiatives through the mandate of its UN Special Envoys in order to reach a ceasefire between all parties, release detainees, guarantee humanitarian access to all parts of the country, protect journalists and NGOs and engage in an inclusive dialogue for a political solution to the conflict that ensued after 2011; whereas this process and the UN-mandated Syrian Constitutional Committee (SCC) remain at a standstill; G. whereas the SCC was established in October 2019 with the mandate to find a political solution to the Syrian conflict, under the auspices of the UN Special Envoy for Syria and in line with UNSC Resolution 2254 (2015); whereas, in spite of its structural deficiencies and Assad’s continuing resistance to constructive cooperation within the SCC, the SCC remains a crucial tool for achieving a peaceful political resolution to the conflict; H. whereas Russia, supported by China, has vetoed 16 UNSC resolutions since 2011, including on a referral of Syria to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and on increasing humanitarian access; whereas Iran and Hezbollah have been directly involved in supporting the Syrian regime’s repression of civilians; whereas Russia has been devoting logistical, diplomatic and financial resources since 2015 to a large-scale military intervention by the Russian Air Force in support of the Syrian regime; I. whereas Turkey has been intervening directly in Syria since 2016 with a view to occupying the northern parts of the country, predominantly consisting of Syrian Kurdish enclaves, in violation of international law, including by invading in October 2019 territories controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF); whereas, in response to these actions by Turkey, a number of EU Member States have formally suspended arms sales to Turkey; J. whereas according to the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries, Turkey has transferred Syrian mercenaries to Nagorno-Karabakh; K. whereas the Global Coalition is continuing its efforts in Iraq, Syria and globally to thwart ISIL/Daesh’s ambitions and the activities of its branches and networks; L. whereas the EU and its Member States suspended diplomatic relations with the Syrian regime in 2012; whereas the EU closed its EU delegation in Damascus in December 2012, following the closure of Member State embassies in early 2012; M. whereas the Council adopted sanctions on individuals and entities involved in the repression of civilians, which were adopted in 2011 and have since been expanded, in order to reach a negotiated political settlement; whereas these sanctions have humanitarian exemptions; N. whereas the Syrian regime’s response to the uprising has led to the destruction of Syria’s economic and social fabric; whereas the collapse of the Syrian pound has been amplified by the collapse of the Lebanese economy as of 2019, and the global economic repercussions related to the COVID-19 pandemic as of March 2020; whereas the cost of basic staples has increased by over 100 % since 2019; O. whereas Syria, under intense international pressure, signed and ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention in October 2013 after committing its largest chemical attacks to date on a civilian neighbourhood east of Damascus in Eastern Ghouta; whereas the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Investigation and Identification Team found the Syrian regime responsible for using chemical weapons on civilians multiple times since; whereas in July 2020 the OPCW Executive Council formally requested once again that the Syrian regime declare its chemical weapons facilities; P. whereas the conflict has resulted in almost 7 million refugees, with over 13 million people dependent on humanitarian aid in Syria, including 6 million women and children, 6,8 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) and 3 million people living in hard-to-reach besieged areas; whereas humanitarian needs have risen by a fifth in the last year alone, with an additional 4,5 million Syrians suffering from food insecurity and 90 % of Syrians living below the poverty line; whereas humanitarian access to all populations in need remains vital and 40 % of the Syrian population reside in non-government controlled areas; whereas in addition to general healthcare for the population, the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated how cross-border access into north-west and north-east Syria remains crucial; whereas winter and the subsequent flooding, which affected some 121 000 people at 304 IDP sites in north-west Syria, brought an additional level of distress to a population that was already extremely vulnerable; whereas the Syrian Government continued to impose severe restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid in government-held areas of Syria and elsewhere in the country; Q. whereas around 12 000 foreign nationals, mostly suspected of having direct or indirect ties to ISIL/Daesh, are imprisoned in seven prisons run by the SDF in north-east Syria; whereas 9 000 of them are held in Al-Hol camp, Syria’s largest, which hosts a total of 64 000 people, mostly families with ties to ISIL/Daesh, of whom 94 % are women and children, including EU citizens; whereas current conditions are highly alarming, especially after the latest killings recorded since the start of this year; R. whereas the conflict has had a particularly severe impact on the lives and human rights of children in Syria; whereas over 29 500 children have been killed, 78 % of whom by the Syrian regime and Iranian militias, 7 % by Russian forces and 3 % by ISIL/Daesh, according to the SNHR; whereas more than 2,6 million girls and boys have been internally displaced from their homes and whereas the mental health of many Syrian children has been and will continue to be deeply affected by the sheer brutality of the conflict; whereas the inability of children in Syria to obtain birth registration and identity documents puts them at risk of statelessness; whereas millions of children have missed years of education, with 2,8 million currently out of school in Syria; S. whereas continuing attacks on health facilities have decimated Syria’s health system and left Syrians struggling to cope with the challenges brought on by the COVID-19 crisis; whereas less than 64 % of hospitals and 52 % of primary healthcare centres across Syria are functioning; whereas 70 % of the health workforce has fled the country, according to the World Health Organization (WHO); T. whereas regular attacks on healthcare facilities have been a hallmark of the Syrian conflict since its onset, in blatant violation of international humanitarian law, and persisted in 2020 during the pandemic; whereas over the past decade, international recognition of the systematic nature of attacks on healthcare in Syria has grown, but clear accountability has proven elusive despite UNSC Resolutions 2139 (2014) and 2286 (2016); whereas the UN Secretary-General established an internal UN Board of Inquiry which examined a limited number of incidents in north-west Syria between September 2019 and April 2020; U. whereas humanitarian advocates and practitioners continue to raise concerns about the security and protection of returnees and displaced individuals in the light of the conditions in many areas of the country and the questions about the Syrian Government’s approach to political reconciliation; V. whereas since 2011 the EU and its Member States have mobilised EUR 20 billion for humanitarian, stabilisation and resilience assistance to Syrians inside the country and in neighbouring countries; whereas the EU has been the driving force behind the Syria pledging conferences which took place in Brussels over four consecutive years (2017-2020), and the fifth Brussels conference, which is due to take place on 29 and 30 March 2021; W. whereas UNSC Resolution 2533 (2020) of 11 July 2020 on cross-border aid renewed only the Bab al-Hawa border crossing, for a one-year period until 10 July 2021, thereby closing the Bab al-Salam, Al Yarubiyah and Al-Ramtha crossings; X. whereas since 2011 millions of Syrians have been stripped of their property rights by new Syrian property laws against those evading military service or fleeing the country without prior authorisation; Y. whereas the Golan Heights are Syrian territory and have been occupied by the State of Israel since 1967; Z. whereas a number of attacks on cultural heritage have been carried out by different parties throughout the course of the conflict, including the destruction and pillaging of archaeological sites at the hand of ISIL/Daesh and the bulldozing, looting and destruction of archaeological sites and Yazidi shrines and graves by the Syrian National Army in Afrin; AA. whereas the Rome Statute of the ICC, signed and ratified by all Member States, affirms that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole – in particular genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes – must not go unpunished; AB. whereas all Member States have ratified the Rome Statute of the ICC as of 2009; whereas in 2011 the Council established the Secretariat of the EU Genocide Network for investigation and prosecution of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, hosted by Eurojust; whereas the EU strategy on Syria calls for the EU to promote accountability for war crimes committed in Syria, with a view to facilitating a national reconciliation process and transitional justice; AC. whereas a Joint Investigative Team (JIT) led by law enforcement and judicial authorities in France and Germany was launched in 2018 for the first time to facilitate the arrest and prosecution of Syrian war criminals following the publication of the Caesar report on the systematic starvation and torture of tens of thousands of women and men in Syria’s detention centres since 2011; 1. Conveys its support for the democratic aspirations of the Syrian people who, 10 years ago on 15 March 2011, peacefully demonstrated for democratic reforms in Deraa, Damascus and the rest of the country; pays tribute to the 500 000 victims of the repression and conflict in Syria since the beginning of the popular uprising; believes that the future of Syria should rest in the hands of Syrians; conveys its support to the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian state and its people; 2. Expresses its deep concern over the persistent political deadlock, and commends the efforts of the UN Special Envoy, Geir O. Pedersen, to find a political solution to the conflict; shares the Special Envoy’s concerns over the lack of any progress; reaffirms that a sustainable solution to the Syrian conflict cannot be achieved militarily; is equally concerned by the economic collapse and the disastrous humanitarian crisis affecting Syria; 3. Expresses its support to UNSC Resolution 2254 (2015) establishing a Syrian-led constitutional reform process; deeply regrets the Syrian regime’s lack of engagement despite repeated engagement and readiness of Syrian opposition representatives to negotiate with the Syrian regime in the drafting of a new Syrian constitution; emphasises in this regard the need for the establishment of a UN-led ceasefire monitoring, verification and reporting mechanism; 4. Opposes any normalisation of diplomatic relations with the Syrian regime as long as there is no fundamental progress on the ground in Syria, with clear, sustained and credible engagement in an inclusive political process; considers the upcoming 2021 Syrian Presidential elections to be lacking any form of credibility in the eyes of the international community in the current context; firmly condemns the visits of MEPs to the Syrian regime, and stresses that those MEPs do not represent the European Parliament; 5. Regrets that some players further divided a fragmented Syrian opposition, obstructing the Geneva Process; 6. Strongly condemns all atrocities and violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, in particular by the Assad Regime, but also by Russian, Iranian and Turkish actors and calls on Russia, Iran and Hezbollah to withdraw all forces and proxies under their command, except for those participating in an international peacekeeping or stabilisation force under mandate of the UN Security Council; deplores the role of Russia and Iran in backing the Syrian regime’s all-out repression of its civilian population, and their takeover of Syria’s political process and economic resources; 7. Calls on Turkey to withdraw its troops from Northern Syria which it is illegally occupying outside of any UN mandate; condemns Turkey’s illegal transfers of Kurdish Syrians from occupied Northern Syria to Turkey for detention and prosecution in violation of Turkey’s international obligations under the Geneva Conventions; urges that all Syrian detainees who have been transferred to Turkey be immediately repatriated to the occupied territories in Syria; is worried that Turkey’s ongoing displacements could amount to ethnic cleansing against the Syrian Kurdish population; stresses that Turkey’s illegal invasion and occupation has jeopardised peace in Syria, the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean; firmly condemns Turkey’s use of Syrian mercenaries in conflicts in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh, in violation of international law; 8. Firmly believes in Syria’s religious and ethnic diversity; deplores the Syrian regime’s long-standing discrimination against Kurdish Syrians; condemns the Syrian regime’s targeted attacks against critical voices, such as European Parliament Sakharov Prize winner Ali Ferzat for his criticism of President Assad, as well as the Syrian regime’s attacks against 124 Christian churches, which was documented by the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR); firmly condemns the assassinations of religious minorities by ISIL/Daesh, and particularly its crimes of genocide against Yazidis and people of the Shiite Muslim and Christian faiths in 2014-2018; deeply deplores the persecution of minorities under armed opposition groups; 9. Reminds the international community of the gravity and the magnitude of human rights violations in Syria perpetrated by different parties to the conflict; points to the Syrian regime’s overwhelming responsibility for its decision to meet peaceful protests with all-out repression through unspeakable means; recalls the importance of the Caesar report and the confirmation, presented to the UNSC by France in 2014, of the credibility of the photos of the 11 000 identified prisoners who were starved and tortured to death in detention centres and military hospitals around Damascus between 2011 and 2013; urges the EU and its Member States to support the UN Commission of Inquiry’s recommendation of March 2021 to facilitate the creation of an independent mechanism with an international mandate and a victim-led approach to locate the missing or their remains, including those found in mass graves; 10. Firmly condemns the killing of 550 international and Syrian journalists by the Syrian regime and dozens by ISIL/Daesh and other armed groups; calls on the Syrian regime to immediately release from prison the 400 journalists it is holding in detention, according to the SNHR; 11. Condemns in the strongest terms the use of rape as a weapon of war against women, whether by the Syrian regime and its militias as documented by the UN International Independent Committee, or by ISIL/Daesh on Yazidi and Shiite women; recalls the role played by women in the 2011 uprising and the fundamental importance of including women at all levels of Syria’s political, economic, judicial power structures, including in transitional justice; reiterates the importance of including women and young people in the conflict resolution process; 12. Reiterates its strongest condemnation of Russian airstrikes which have killed a total of over 6 900 civilians including 2 000 children using cluster munitions, vacuum bombs and long range missiles, targeting independent media centres, hospitals, humanitarian infrastructure including over 207 medical facilities, according to the SNHR, and Syrian civil defence units such as members of the White Helmets humanitarian organisation; denounces Russia’s attempts to tarnish the image of the White Helmets in Western media through an aggressive and sustained disinformation campaign on social media; condemns in the strongest terms the involvement of Russian warplanes in the Syrian regime’s chemical attacks, such as in the chemical massacre of Khan Sheikhoun of April 2017, after which Russian warplanes immediately bombed the only hospital where the victims were being treated; 13. Urges the Syrian regime to immediately release the 130 000 political prisoners unjustly detained, including women, men and children forcibly disappeared by Syrian security forces; firmly condemns the systematic use of torture, inhuman treatments and sexual violence in the horrendous conditions in which they are being held, without any access to a civilian court, a lawyer, medical care or their families; stresses that they are being denied their basic rights to a fair trial, including the withholding of information on their arrest and torture to extract bogus confessions; urges the Syrian authorities to without exception provide immediate and unhindered access to detention facilities for recognised international humanitarian NGOs and monitoring organisations without prior notification; 14. Stresses that ISIL/Daesh is still active in the region and has not been defeated; expresses its concerns about the difficulties encountered in preserving and obtaining access to evidence of crimes perpetrated by ISIL/Daesh and uncovering the fate of those kidnapped; calls on the EU and its Member States to support efforts on the ground to document and preserve evidence of those crimes; welcomes the prosecution of EU and non-EU nationals who have joined ISIL/Daesh; 15. Expresses its concern over the resurgence of ISIL/Daesh in north-east Syria; commends the efforts of the international coalition against ISIL/Daesh; stresses the importance of continued, long-term US engagement in the coalition; reaffirms its support for the efforts of the Global Coalition against ISIL/Daesh, and underlines the significant contribution made by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) as an ally in the fight against ISIL/Daesh; 16. Expresses its concern about the rising tensions in Iraqi Kurdistan, which has enjoyed more stability in recent years than Syria, and has provided a safe haven to Syrian refugees; 17. Reaffirms that the persons responsible for core international crimes must be duly prosecuted, including by EU Member States, in the absence of other international or national processes of transitional justice; emphasises the key importance of resolving the issue of those detained and disappeared by all parties to the conflict as a fundamental part of any transitional process with the aim of achieving peace; 18. Recalls that the International Criminal Court (ICC) should remain the primary jurisdiction for international justice for crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression; considers that the lack of accountability provides a breeding ground for further atrocities and compounds the suffering of the victims; insists, therefore, on the need to hold all perpetrators to account, notably through the application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, and to provide reparation to victims; stresses that the introduction of restorative justice measures cannot wait until the end of the conflict and urges the EU and its Member States to step up their support for processes led by representative groups of Syrians; firmly condemns Russia’s 16 UNSC vetoes, with the support of China, to referring Syria to the ICC; 19. Welcomes the first ever sentencing of a Syrian regime security officer for complicity in crimes against humanity on 24 February 2021 at the court in Koblenz in Germany; 20. Commends EU Member States’ efforts since 2019 to secure broad international support for securing long-term funding within the UN general budget for the UN’s International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Persons Responsible for the Most Serious Crimes under International Law Committed in Syria since March 2011 (IIIM); 21. Welcomes the Franco-German Joint Investigative Team (JIT) to support the prosecution of the crimes against humanity documented by the Caesar report; welcomes the international arrest warrants issued by both countries in 2018 to arrest three high-ranking security officials; commends the role played by local Syrian NGOs in verifying, documenting, gathering and protecting evidence of crimes against humanity and war crimes, as well as the complementary role played by NGOs such as the Commission for International Accountability and Justice in assisting European law enforcement and judicial authorities in effectively prosecuting war criminals present on EU Member States’ territory; calls on the EU to provide more legal training to Syrians to enable them to play a role in the fight against impunity; 22. Calls on the Commission to present an EU action plan on impunity, with a specific chapter on Syria; stresses that this action plan should seek to better coordinate and harmonise Member States’ resources and efforts to prosecute war criminals in the EU; is of the view that transitional justice plays a fundamental role in securing peace in the long term; calls on the EU to launch a designated European fund for victims of crimes against humanity in Syria; 23. Supports Member States’ efforts to improve coordination of judicial, police and immigration resources through the development of pooled jurisdictions in order to mutualise their judicial competences and facilitate prosecution; stresses that better-equipped Member States should share their experts and interpreters in order to facilitate efficient and effective investigations, while each Member State should endeavour to appoint a designated prosecutor for these crimes in order to speed up judicial coordination efforts; 24. Calls on Member States to automatically share at EU level information on war criminal suspects under Article 1F of the Geneva Convention; is of the view that there also needs to be closer cooperation between immigration authorities and public prosecutors on suspected war criminals at national level; 25. Urges all EU Member States without exception to be fully cooperative in the fight against impunity; expresses its deep concern over certain Member States’ lack of cooperation in prosecuting Syrian war criminals; 26. Fully supports European efforts led by the Netherlands since September 2020 to launch legal proceedings against Syria at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for its violation of the UN Convention against Torture; 27. Calls on Member States to request the suspension of Syria’s membership to the OPCW for falsifying evidence of the use of chemical weapons at the upcoming spring 2021 OPCW conference; reiterates its shock at and condemnation of the Syrian regime’s 336 documented chemical attacks dropping chlorine gas, sarin and sulphur mustard gas on civilians; 28. Firmly condemns attacks on humanitarian workers by all sides, especially by the Syrian regime and ISIL/Daesh; points out that the Syrian regime bears particular responsibility for targeted killings of humanitarian workers since 2011; highlights Russia’s overwhelming responsibility for attacks on humanitarian workers, particularly for its bombing of 21 Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) field hospitals in October 2015; 29. Expresses its profound concern at the ongoing suffering of the Syrian people, 10 years after the conflict began; is particularly concerned that humanitarian needs in Syria have risen by a fifth in the last year alone, and that an additional 4,5 million Syrians now suffer from food insecurity, while 90 % live below the poverty line; considers that humanitarian access must remain a central priority for the EU in Syria, and that increased needs require an greater financial and political response from the EU; notes that UNSC Resolution 2533 on the border crossing at Bab al-Hawa is coming up for renewal in July 2021; regrets the fact that Russia and China abstained from the last vote instead of voting in favour of the resolution; is of the opinion that cross-line delivery of humanitarian assistance cannot be relied upon to deliver for the people currently relying on cross-border delivery; recalls that 2,4 million Syrians depend on this border crossing for survival. and that failure to extend this crossing for a minimum of 12 months would have severe and life threatening consequences; condemns the actions of those UNSC members that have sought to limit humanitarian access for political purposes; urges all UNSC members to support the renewal of the cross-border resolution in order to avoid a worsening humanitarian crisis and to ensure the expansion and support for cross-line interventions carried out in line with humanitarian principles; highlights the importance of ensuring the immediate reauthorisation of the Bab al-Salam and Yarubiyah border crossing points in line with UN General Assembly Resolution 74/169, in order to ensure that aid reaches populations in need in both the north-west and north-east by the most direct routes; underlines the importance of ensuring that humanitarian aid is exclusively directed to those most in need; 30. Calls on the international community to urgently address the record levels of humanitarian need of the Syrian people inside and outside Syria; encourages the EU as a convener of the Brussels V Syria pledging conference to rally other international donors towards increasing support for the health sector of the Syria Humanitarian Response Plan (HRP) through increased, flexible, multi-year funding that covers population needs in the long term; calls on international donors to specifically invest in programmes that repair, restore and strengthen damaged or destroyed health facilities, in addition to other civilian infrastructures that have suffered damage; 31. Urges the UNSC to include explicit calls for the protection of health workers in forthcoming UN resolutions and official discussions; calls on EU Member States, in this regard, to offer political backing and operational support to UN-led accountability initiatives and investigations to uphold international humanitarian law; 32. Stresses, ahead of the Brussels V Donor Conference of 29-30 March 2021, the importance of not only maintaining humanitarian assistance pledges but increasing them for Syrians, IDPs and refugees, as well as for communities affected by the crisis in the region; points to the fact the EU and its Member States have been the largest humanitarian donors to respond to Syria’s humanitarian crisis, with donations since 2011 reaching EUR 20 billion; is deeply concerned about alleged UK Government plans to cut its aid contributions significantly, including reductions of 67 % for Syria and 88 % for Lebanon; 33. Commends the role played by neighbouring states that offer solidarity and assistance to Syria’s refugees in Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq; urges EU Member States to continue to fund humanitarian assistance programmes in refugee host countries, as well as for IDPs in Syria; urges EU Member States to provide all necessary funding and support to ensure all Syrian refugee children in host countries have access not only to primary, but also to secondary education; urges all host countries to adopt all necessary measures to achieve this, and to remove any administrative or legislative obstacles; encourages host countries to focus on access to employment, health services and education, and civic documentation, which will promote the ability of refugees to work towards becoming self-reliant; 34. Notes that the EU’s Madad Trust Fund in Response to the Syrian crisis will expire by the end of 2021; calls on the Commission to secure financial means for the EU’s humanitarian response to the Syrian crisis under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument, and to ensure the unhindered functioning of its projects; 35. Calls on all Member States to support principled humanitarian assistance, without normalising relations with the Syrian regime; warns against investing EU financial assets whether directly or indirectly in Syria’s general reconstruction if the Syrian regime does not implement a credible political process; calls on the VP/HR, as part of the long-term planning for the response in Syria, to develop a robust human rights due diligence policy for future rebuilding interventions in close cooperation with Syrian civil society, including a monitoring framework with dedicated indicators for human rights standards; deplores Russian, Iranian, Chinese and Turkish business plans to profit from Syria’s destruction; 36. Calls on Member States to maintain sanctions on individuals and entities involved in the repression in Syria; stresses the importance of avoiding any unintended negative consequences of sanctions through humanitarian exemptions for principled humanitarian action, and the importance of addressing banking over-compliance challenges jointly with the US; 37. Urges the EU and its Member States to renew and expand the list of those subjected to targeted sanctions under the new EU Global Human Rights Sanction Regime, including the Syrian, Russian and Iranian civilian and military commanders who are credibly implicated in war crimes; 38. Commits to the adoption of effective EU corporate due diligence legislation imposing human rights due diligence obligations to EU companies and companies operating in the single market; 39. Reminds all Member States that Syria is not a safe country to return to; believes that any return should be safe, voluntary, dignified and informed, in line with the EU’s stated position; calls on all EU Member States to refrain from shifting national policies towards depriving certain categories of Syrians of their protected status, and to reverse this trend if they have already applied such policies; urges Lebanon, Turkey and all countries in the region to suspend deportations of Syrians back to Syria against their will; 40. Condemns the irreparable damage that Assad’s scorched earth tactics have inflicted on cultural sites, and the looting and smuggling of artefacts by jihadists, who use them to finance their role in the conflict; 41. Is extremely concerned by the deteriorating humanitarian, sanitary and security situation at camps in north-east Syria, notably Al-Hol and Roj camps, which remain breeding grounds for radicalisation; believes that EU nationals suspected of belonging to terrorist organisations and detained in those camps should be tried in a court of law; expresses its shock at the killing of an MSF employee working in Al-Hol camp on 24 February 2021, which further demonstrates the human toll of the violence and unsafe living conditions in the camp; 42. Calls on Member States to protect child nationals who may be detained for security-related offences or association with armed groups; 43. Calls on Member States to repatriate all European children, taking into account their specific family situations and the best interests of the child as a primary consideration, and to provide the necessary support for their rehabilitation and reintegration in full compliance with international law; 44. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European External Action Service, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Government and the Council of Representatives of Iraq, the Regional Government of Kurdistan and the Government and Parliament of the Russian Federation.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Declaration of the EU as an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the “Charter”), – having regard to Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), – having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights and the related case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, – having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, – having regard to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation(1), – having regard to Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC(2), – having regard to Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services(3), – having regard to Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation(4), – having regard to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), – having regard to the Commission communication of 12 November 2020 entitled ‘Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025’ (COM(2020)0698), – having regard to its resolution of 14 February 2019 on the future of the LGBTI List of Actions (2019-2024)(5), – having regard to its resolution of 18 December 2019 on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI-free zones(6), – having regard to the EU Guidelines to promote and protect the enjoyment of all human rights by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons, adopted by the Council in 2013, – having regard to the results of the EU LGBT Survey launched by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) in 2019, – having regard to its resolution of 17 September 2020 on the proposal for a Council decision on the determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law(7), – having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2018 on a proposal calling on the Council to determine, pursuant to Article 7(1) TEU, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded(8), – having regard to the Council of Europe’s Recommendation of 31 March 2010 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on measures to combat discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity (CM/Rec(2010)5) and to the standards adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, – having regard to the Memorandum of 3 December 2020 of the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe on the stigmatisation of LGBTI people in Poland, – having regard to the debate in the Council of Europe’s Congress of Local Regional Authorities Current Affairs Committee, and to its subsequent reports entitled ‘Fact-finding report on the role of local authorities with regard to the situation and rights of LGBTIQ people in Poland’ of 27 January 2021 and ‘Protecting LGBTIQ people in the context of rising anti-LGBTIQ hate speech and discrimination: The role of local and regional authorities’ of 10 February 2021, – having regard to Rule 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure, A. whereas LGBTIQ rights are human rights; B. whereas the right to equal treatment and non-discrimination is a fundamental right enshrined in the EU Treaties and in the Charter, and should be fully respected; whereas all Member States have assumed obligations and duties under international law and the EU Treaties to respect, guarantee, protect and fulfil fundamental rights; whereas combating inequality in the EU is a shared responsibility, requiring joint efforts and action at every level of government; C. whereas since March 2019, over 100 regions, counties and municipalities across Poland have adopted resolutions declaring themselves free from so-called LGBTI ideology or have adopted ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’; whereas in November 2020, the Hungarian town of Nagykáta adopted a resolution banning the ‘dissemination and promotion of LGBTQ propaganda’; whereas these resolutions discriminate directly and indirectly against LGBTIQ people; whereas LGBT-free zone resolutions declare opposition to the ‘ideology of the LGBT movement’ and call on local governments to refrain from any action that would encourage tolerance towards LGBTIQ people, including withdrawing financial assistance from organisations that aim to promote non-discrimination and equality; whereas the ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’ use a very narrow definition of the family, while calling on municipalities to protect family rights in all their policies, initiatives and funding; whereas by focusing only on these types of family, the Regional Charters are indirectly calling for discrimination against all other forms of families, in particular single-parent, same-sex couples’ and rainbow families, and to refrain from providing financial support to projects and initiatives which protect and promote fundamental rights, organise anti-discrimination education or in any other way support equality and LGBTIQ people; D. whereas the Polish Ombudsman for Human Rights has initiated nine complaints against some of the regions, counties and municipalities which have adopted resolutions on being free from ‘LGBT ideology’, which has resulted to date in four resolutions being declared unconstitutional by administrative courts; whereas in January 2021, the Polish town of Nowa Dęba withdrew its resolution declaring itself free from so-called LGBT ideology following the loss of a twinning agreement with the Irish town of Fermoy; whereas the Polish county of Sztum and the Polish town of Tomaszów Mazowiecki withdrew their resolutions adopting Regional Charters of Family Rights in September and October 2020 respectively; E. whereas Norway withdrew from granting funds to the Polish regions, counties and municipalities which had adopted resolutions declaring themselves free from so-called LGBTI ideology or had adopted ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’; whereas the Commission has rejected applications for EU funding under its town twinning programme from Polish towns that had adopted LGBTI-free zones or family rights resolutions; whereas all EU funds managed under the Common Provisions Regulations 2021-2027 must respect the principle of non-discrimination and respect fundamental rights as set out in the Treaty, including on the basis of sexual orientation, and whereas municipalities acting as employers must respect Directive 2000/78/EC, which prohibits discrimination and harassment on the ground of sexual orientation in employment, in accordance with the judgment in Case C-507/18 Associazione Avvocatura per i diritti LGBTI(9); F. whereas a legal complaint was submitted to the Commission by three NGOs highlighting that ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’ and resolutions declaring regions, counties and municipalities to be free from so-called LGBTI ideology introduce discrimination against LGBTIQ people and thus breach Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, as well as Articles 15 and 21 of the Charter on the freedom to choose an occupation and the right to engage in work and on non-discrimination respectively; whereas to date the Commission has neither provided a response to this legal complaint nor formally recognised a violation of EU law; G. whereas the adoption of resolutions on being free from so-called LGBT ideology or ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’ are part of a broader context of increased discrimination and attacks against the LGBTIQ community in Poland, which include characterising diversity of sexuality, identity and expression as a dangerous ideology, of growing hate speech by public authorities, elected officials – including by the current President – and the pro-Government media, as well as of arrests of LGBTIQ rights activists, of attacks against and bans on Pride marches and awareness-raising programmes and actions, including in schools, and of discriminatory anti-LGBT demonstrations; whereas hate speech by public authorities legitimises and further fuels the climate of intolerance and discrimination against LGBTIQ people; whereas exercising freedom of expression carries duties and responsibilities, particularly for public authorities, politicians and opinion leaders, and whereas they should not engage in hate speech or any discourse stigmatising LGBTIQ people, and should firmly denounce and counter such narratives and stigmatisation, including when they are expressed by private parties; H. whereas the Polish activists who are acting against and informing the public about the resolutions on being free from so-called LGBTI ideology and the ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’ are facing strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) owing to their work; whereas the Polish activists who are working to denounce anti-LGBTIQ declarations and family charters, including the authors of the ‘Atlas of Hate’ website and the creator of the ‘LGBT-free zone’ photo project, have been subjected to unfounded lawsuits filed by local governments or fundamentalist organisations claiming substantial financial compensation, and to a smear campaign labelling them as liars for using creative advocacy tools; whereas these actions are clearly intended to intimidate and silence civil society; whereas the Polish authorities have a duty to fully protect all persons belonging to minorities, including LGBTIQ people, from hostility and aggression, and to enable them to carry out their activities freely; whereas the Commission has not introduced anti-SLAPP legislation, despite repeated calls from Parliament; I. whereas two petitions (No 0448/2020 and No 0354/2020) on the issue of ‘LGBTI-free zones in Poland’ have been submitted to the Committee on Petitions; whereas these petitions were discussed in the Committee on Petitions on 26 January 2021 and, owing to the unsatisfactory answer from the Commission, remain open for the Commission to further clarify the situation; J. whereas the LGBTI Survey II published by the FRA in May 2020 highlights an increase in intolerance and violence towards LGBTIQ persons or persons who are perceived to be LGBTIQ in Poland, and shows Polish LGBTIQ respondents’ complete absence of faith in the government’s efforts to combat discrimination and violence, recording the lowest percentage of anywhere in the Union (only 4 %), and the highest percentage of respondents avoiding going to certain places for fear of being assaulted, harassed or threatened (79 %); whereas this shows a clear correlation between LGBTIQ-phobic governance and increased discrimination and violence against LGBTIQ people; K. whereas Parliament has already encouraged the Member States to criminalise ‘so-called conversion therapy’ practices; whereas the May 2020 report of the UN Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity has called on Member States to adopt bans on practices of ‘conversion therapy’; whereas the practice is still carried out in at least 69 countries worldwide, including in the European Union, where the use of medication, psychotherapy and ritual cleansing in conversion therapy have been reported to have taken place in EU Member States(10); whereas the practice has only been banned in two Member States of the European Union, namely Malta and Germany; L. whereas the backlash against LGBTIQ people is often coupled with a broader deterioration in the situation of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; whereas the European Parliament has expressed its deep concern in several resolutions on the deterioration in the rule of law in Poland, in particular with regard to the independence of the judiciary and the protection of fundamental rights; whereas no proper response has yet been given to Parliament’s initiative on the establishment of an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights to be governed by an interinstitutional agreement between Parliament, the Commission and the Council; M. whereas Parliament has expressed its position in several of its resolutions on the situation of the rule of law, fundamental rights and democracy in Poland, concluding that a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 TEU exists and that it constitutes a clear risk of a serious breach thereof; whereas the hearings with the Polish authorities organised by the Council under Article 7(1) TEU in response to threats to common European values in Poland have not produced any results; whereas the situation of the rule of law and fundamental rights in Poland has not only not been addressed but has also seriously deteriorated since the triggering of the procedure, alongside the situation of fundamental rights, specifically those of LGBTIQ persons and women; whereas the Council should ensure that hearings under Article 7(1) TEU also address new developments and assess risks of breaches of fundamental rights; N. whereas the President of the Commission Ursula von der Leyen declared in her 2020 State of the Union address to the European Parliament Plenary that ‘LGBTQI-free zones are humanity free zones. And they have no place in our Union’; whereas the Commission President also declared that LGBTQI is a person’s identity not an ideology(11); whereas the Commission and the Council should refrain from narrowly interpreting the principle of the rule of law; whereas the Commission should not hesitate to use all tools, including infringement procedures, the Rule of Law Framework, Article 7 TEU, as well as the recently adopted Regulation on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, in order to address violations of the fundamental rights of LGBTIQ people everywhere in the Union; whereas the new Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme can contribute to building a non-discriminatory and more equal society through making funds available to civil society organisations promoting LGBTIQ equality; O. whereas many Member States have in the past discriminated against and persecuted LGBTIQ people through discriminatory laws and policies; whereas thousands of LGBTIQ people were arrested, incarcerated and died in concentration camps during the Second World War; whereas while LGBTIQ persons in Poland face systematic discrimination, this is also an issue across the EU, with little to no progress being made in alleviating the persistent discrimination against and harassment of LGBTIQ people; whereas public discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes against LGBTIQ people are still prevalent across the EU; whereas these attacks violate the fundamental rights of LGBTIQ people and responses from public authorities too often remain inadequate; whereas LGBTIQ persons in every Member State still face a higher rate of discrimination in all areas of life, including at work and at school, and a high prevalence of physical, emotional and sexual attacks, both online and offline, which leads to a worrying suicide rate among young LGBTIQ people(12), and especially among young transgender people; whereas several Member States have updated legislation so as to be more inclusive of LGBTIQ persons; whereas there are nevertheless several legislative gaps that require political will and commitment by national legislators so as to ensure true equality for LGBTIQ people; P. whereas transgender persons continue to face some of the worst forms of discrimination, violence and persecution; whereas in 2018 the Commission published a study entitled ‘Trans and intersex equality rights in Europe – a comparative analysis’; whereas only 13 out of the 31 countries surveyed in the study have national legislation, at least to some extent, providing protection on the basis of gender identity and/or sex characteristics; Q. whereas 2021 has seen the emergence of social media initiatives such as the #MeTooGay movement to denounce sexual abuse within the LGBTIQ community; whereas Guillaume Tran Thanh, the student who initiated this manifestation of freedom of expression, ended his life shortly afterwards, under too much pressure after his denunciation on social media; whereas such a tragedy raises questions about the shortcomings in support for victims of sexual violence; R. whereas many Member States lack specific non-discrimination laws which at least adhere to minimum EU standards that protect people from discrimination, hate speech and violence based on sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics, and whereas they have failed to take action to remedy this legal lacuna; whereas the horizontal directive on non-discrimination, which could partially fill this this gap in protection beyond employment, has remained blocked in the Council for over 10 years; whereas the implementation of legal measures against discrimination, where present, is still insufficient in many Member States; whereas the Commission intends to extend the list of ‘EU crimes’ under Article 83(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to cover hate crime and hate speech, including when targeted at LGBTIQ people; S. whereas discrimination and violence against LGBTIQ people by the police remains an issue in the Union; whereas, without adequate training, the police may deter LGBTIQ people from reporting violence and discrimination against them; whereas this remains a major obstacle to effective equality; whereas training programmes for law enforcement authorities help to prevent and tackle discriminatory practices and hate crimes; whereas hate speech and crimes against LGBTIQ persons should be fully investigated, taking into account bias motivation and, where appropriate, should be duly prosecuted; T. whereas only Malta, Portugal and some regions of Spain have prohibited medical intervention on intersex persons without their consent; whereas many Member States continue to follow an approach that is highly medicalised and pathologising; U. whereas legal developments in Hungary have severely hindered the fundamental rights of LGBTIQ people; whereas the adoption of Article 33 of the Omnibus Bill T/9934 de facto bans legal gender recognition for trans and intersex persons in Hungary, exposing them to discrimination and infringing their right to privacy; whereas in December 2020, the Hungarian Parliament adopted constitutional amendments which further restrict the rights of LGBTIQ people, neglect the existence of transgender and non-binary persons and restrict their right to family life, and a law that will strip non-married couples of the right to adoption; V. whereas in January 2021, the Latvian Parliament began examining the constitutional amendment seeking to restrict the extension of the concept of family, as indicated in the ruling by the Constitutional Court, whereby the latter recognised the application of the Labour Law to different family models and obliged the legislator to ensure support and protection of same-sex couples; W. whereas a bill to prohibit activities aimed at addressing gender identity theory in educational contexts was adopted by the Romanian Senate in June 2020; whereas the Romanian President refused to promulgate the law, asking instead for a constitutionality review; whereas the Romanian Constitutional Court declared in December 2020 that the law was incompatible with the Constitution; whereas this shows that effective checks and balances in Member States as regards the rule of law and democracy are crucial for the protection of LGBTIQ rights; X. whereas being a parent in one Member State means that you are a parent in all Member States; whereas there are cases of children with two same-sex parents who are facing difficulties owing to the lack of legal provisions for the mutual recognition of a birth certificate with two same-sex parents; whereas a CJEU preliminary ruling referred by the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad (Bulgaria) in Case C-490/20 will decide on the case of a child with two lesbian mothers who faces statelessness due to this legal lacuna; whereas the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy envisages a legislative initiative to close this legal gap and a revision of the 2009 guidelines on free movement, both scheduled for 2022; whereas same-sex couples continue to face difficulties when exercising freedom of movement within the EU, but the Commission has nevertheless not proposed initiating legislation on the mutual recognition of relationships; Y. whereas combating inequality in the EU is a shared responsibility, requiring joint efforts and action at every level of government, and whereas local and regional authorities have a key role to play in this; whereas these authorities are often responsible for implementing EU laws and embracing equality and diversity; whereas the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe has adopted a resolution recalling the responsibilities of local authorities in protecting the rights of LGBTIQ persons and has invited them to appoint a ‘Local Expert on Equality and Diversity’(13); Z. whereas the European Committee of the Regions, as a representative of local and regional EU authorities, has been invited to consider taking action, within the remit of its competences, in response to the development of zones free from so-called LGBT ideology; AA. whereas LGBTIQ persons everywhere in the European Union should enjoy the freedom to live and publicly show their sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics without fear of intolerance, discrimination or persecution on those grounds; whereas the right of asylum is guaranteed by the Charter; whereas appropriate protection of vulnerable applicants, including LGBTIQ applicants, needs to be ensured in the context of the common European asylum system and its reform; AB. whereas, rather than discriminating against LGBTIQ persons, the authorities at all levels of governance across the entire European Union should protect and promote equality and the fundamental rights of all, including LGBTIQ persons, and ensure their rights in full; 1. Hereby declares the European Union an ‘LGBTIQ Freedom Zone’; 2. Denounces all forms of violence or discrimination against persons on the basis of their sex or sexual orientation; condemns in the strongest possible terms the manifestly homophobic murder of David Polfliet committed in Belgium; 3. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Council, the Commission, the European Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Children's Rights |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The European Parliament, – having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989, – having regard to the General Comments of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child(1), – having regard to the UN Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children(2), – having regard to the UN Global Study on Children Deprived of Liberty of July 2019, – having regard to the UN policy brief of 15 April 2020 entitled ‘The impact of COVID-19 on children’, and to the positive response co-led by the EU and the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC) and signed by 173 countries, – having regard to the policy response of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) of 19 October 2020 entitled ‘What is the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on immigrants and their children?’, – having regard to the declaration of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe of 1 February 2012 on the rise of anti-Gypsyism and racist violence against Roma in Europe, – having regard to Article 3(3) and 3(5) of the Treaty on European Union, – having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the “Charter”), – having regard to Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography(3) (“Child Sexual Abuse Directive”), – having regard to the EU directives on procedural rights(4), – having regard to the Commission recommendation of 20 February 2013 entitled ‘Investing in children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage’(5), – having regard to the International Year for the Elimination of Child Labour 2021 and the Commission’s zero tolerance approach towards child labour, – having regard to the Commission communication of 12 April 2017 on the protection of children in migration(6), – having regard to the Council conclusions of 8 June 2017 on the protection of children in migration, – having regard to the Commission communications adopted with the aim of creating a Union of Equality, in line with the Political Guidelines for the next European Commission 2019-2024(7), – having regard to the Commission communication of 24 June 2020 entitled ‘EU Strategy on victims’ rights (2020-2025)’(8), – having regard to its resolution of 26 November 2019 on children’s rights on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of UN Convention on the Rights of the Child(9), – having regard to its resolution of 3 May 2018 on the protection of children in migration(10), – having regard to its resolution of 12 February 2019 on the need for a strengthened post-2020 Strategic EU Framework for National Roma Inclusion Strategies and stepping up the fight against anti-Gypsyism(11), – having regard to its resolution of 17 September 2020 entitled ‘Implementation of National Roma Integration Strategies: combating negative attitudes towards people with Romani background in Europe’(12), – having regard to the question to the Commission on children’s rights in view of the EU Strategy on the rights of the child (O-000007/2021 – B9‑0007/2021), – having regard to Rules 136(5) and 132(2) of its Rules of Procedure, – having regard to the motion for a resolution of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, A. whereas a child is first and foremost a child, regardless of the child’s ethnic origin, gender, nationality, social and economic background, ability, migration or residency status, needs special protection and is entitled to all the rights enshrined in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; B. whereas the best interests of the child must be a primary consideration in all actions and decisions concerning them and their physical and mental well-being; C. whereas children have the right to inclusive, affordable early childhood education, care of good quality, and leisure; whereas children, particularly children from disadvantaged backgrounds, have the right to protection from poverty and to specific measures to enhance equal opportunities and combat discrimination and segregation in education; whereas investment in early childhood development brings high returns from an economic and societal point of view; D. whereas before the outbreak of COVID-19, children were twice as likely as adults to be living in extreme poverty(13); whereas as a consequence of the pandemic, it is estimated that the number of children living below their respective national poverty lines could soar by as many as 117 million, and approximately 150 million additional children are living in multidimensional poverty(14); whereas the current pandemic has further exacerbated inequalities and increased the risk of children falling into extreme poverty, in comparison with the pre-COVID-19 period, when one in four children in Europe was already at risk of poverty; E. whereas up to 1,6 billion children worldwide have been affected by school closures due to the current COVID-19 pandemic and it is estimated that at least 24 million students could drop out of school as a result(15); whereas 370 million children worldwide – many of whom are reliant on school meals as a key source of their daily nutrition – have missed 40 % of in-school meals, on average, since COVID-19 restrictions caused classrooms to close(16); whereas children, in particular girls and children with disabilities, from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds are particularly affected by the impact of school closures and measures that have restricted access to education, both in schools and with distance learning; F. whereas the right to education has been severely impacted by COVID-19; whereas, while education policy remains a competence of the Member States, the COVID-19 pandemic and the inequalities that it has caused in education represent a common challenge that demands a common Union approach, policies and tools; G. whereas Eurostat(17) research shows that 88,3 % of children in the EU in 2018 aged between three years and the minimum compulsory school age received formal childcare, showing the increased need to establish more day care facilities for children as an important tool for the cognitive and social development of children from an early age; H. whereas home schooling is still not an option for more than two thirds of children worldwide because of a lack of internet access; whereas home schooling has highlighted the educational and digital divides in many EU Member States and worldwide, impacting children’s life chances as well as their physical and mental health, and whereas young girls and young people in vulnerable situations and from racialised groups are particularly affected by the digital divide; I. whereas worldwide, one in four girls aged 15 to 19 are not in education, employment or training, compared with one in 10 boys; whereas promoting gender equality and the empowerment of girls is central to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals(18); J. whereas children appear to have been spared from the most severe health consequences of the current global pandemic; whereas the COVID-19 crisis is, however, taking a huge toll on children, posing an increasing and direct threat to their well-being and development, including with regard to their mental health; whereas children from disadvantaged backgrounds, unaccompanied minors, and children belonging to minorities such as Romani children are particularly affected; whereas, to date, it is estimated that an additional 1,2 million children and 56 700 mothers could die within six months due to disruption to basic interventions such as routine health service coverage; whereas insufficient access to healthcare services can affect all areas of life(19); K. whereas there has been an increase in the suicide rate in many EU Member States; whereas in a recent survey of young people across the EU, almost one in five responded that they suffered from mental health problems or symptoms such as depression or anxiety(20); whereas the UN has warned of a global mental health crisis, and a lack of action could have a devastating long-term social and economic cost to society, with children and adolescents among those most at risk(21); L. whereas shortcomings in national child protection systems and a lack of transnational cooperation mechanisms among Member States can further contribute to social exclusion, as well as the exploitation of children, in particular children on the move; whereas some discrimination has been reported as a result of the procedures and practices adopted by the authorities in cross-border family disputes involving children(22); whereas the hotlines also report an increase in the number of calls related to cases of child abduction, especially during recent months, due to the aggravation of existing international family conflicts; M. whereas according to the latest Commission report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings(23), children accounted for nearly a quarter of all registered victims across all Member States; N. whereas 152 million children are involved in child labour worldwide and approximately 73 million of these children are subjected to one of the worst forms of child labour: slavery, bonded labour, dangerous work or sexual exploitation(24); whereas the Commission has declared ‘zero tolerance on child labour’ a policy priority that must be adhered to; O. whereas one in three girls experience female genital mutilation (FGM) and one in five will be married while they are still children; whereas FGM is recognised internationally as a violation of human rights; whereas child marriage is still an issue in some Member States and has a devastating impact on the rights and health of girls and women, including posing a serious risk of complications in pregnancy, as well as exposing girls to sexual abuse, domestic violence and even honour killing; P. whereas as a result of the pandemic and as a consequence of the lockdown, domestic and gender-based violence and, according to the latest Europol report(25), child sexual abuse and exploitation online on both the surface web and the dark web have increased in the EU; whereas between 70 % and 85 % of children who have suffered abuse know their abuser and the vast majority are victims of people they trust(26); whereas other risks linked to increased periods of time spent online, such as cyberbullying, have also grown because of these measures; Q. whereas children with disabilities are vulnerable and can face social exclusion, marginalisation, discrimination and reduced access to services; whereas they are more likely to be neglected, exploited or sexually abused; whereas children with disabilities have greater healthcare needs and a greater dependence on community-based services(27); R. whereas in 2019, 30,3 % of asylum seekers were children, representing 207 215 children in the EU; whereas 7,1 % of these children were unaccompanied minors(28); whereas many children are exposed to unacceptable humanitarian situations at the EU’s external borders, or outside the EU; whereas unaccompanied children represent a highly vulnerable group and face various risks, including being victims of criminal networks, violence, abuse and exploitation along migration routes towards and within the EU(29); whereas migrant children are often denied access to integration and inclusion measures, protection and social security; whereas unaccompanied asylum-seeking children who turn 18 face particular challenges as they often have to leave their child-specific accommodation; whereas children applying for international protection might suffer due to delays in issuing the final decision; S. whereas there are significant gaps and deficiencies in the implementation of the special safeguards and procedural guarantees for children set out in the Common European Asylum System, with variations between the Member States, for example in the possibility for children to remain with their family members and/or guardians in a non-custodial context, and in particular in family reunification in line with Council Directive 2003/86/EC(30), reception conditions, the appointment of legal representatives and guardians, and access to child-friendly information, health and social services and education; T. whereas children continue to be born stateless, including in the EU, and continue to be excluded from access to basic rights; whereas an estimated 200 million children worldwide do not have a birth certificate, heightening the risk of statelessness and putting them at a severe disadvantage in accessing rights and services; whereas the right of the child to acquire a nationality and be registered immediately after birth is enshrined in Article 7 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; U. whereas children are among the most vulnerable to the impact of climate change, which is affecting their life expectancy, their health, their right to education and their right to be protected, and is causing displacement in regions prone to natural disasters; whereas environmental risks account for one in four child deaths(31); V. whereas children’s participation is still scarce in EU internal and external policy-making; whereas systemic ways to embed rights-based child participation in policy-making at EU, national and local level should be implemented; whereas children have a right to participate in democratic life and in decisions that directly or indirectly affect them; whereas the most marginalised and excluded groups have even fewer opportunities to participate in policy and decision-making processes; W. whereas a significant number of children are still being detained in the EU; whereas the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has clarified that children should never be detained for immigration purposes, and that detention can never be justified as being in a child’s best interests, in line with the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants of 19 September 2016; whereas Member States must provide adequate, humane and non-custodial alternatives to detention, including ensuring that COVID-19 measures never lead to the detention of children; whereas Member States should systematically collect disaggregated data on the detention of children in the context of migration, while the Commission should encourage the comparability of such data through Eurostat; X. whereas children placed in closed institutions have been particularly affected by the pandemic; whereas confinement measures exacerbate the vulnerability of children living in psychiatric and social care institutions, orphanages, refugee camps, detention centres and other closed facilities; whereas cases of violence against children confined in these premises are likely to go undetected and child and family welfare services are overstretched and disrupted; Y. whereas the General Data Protection Regulation(32) recognises that children merit specific protection with regard to their personal data and that they require information about their data to be presented to them in child-friendly language; whereas children’s access to social media platforms must go hand in hand with their enhanced understanding of digital technologies; whereas promoting digital education, literacy and skills is key to clamping down on social media misuse, particularly in the case of underage users accessing platforms that do not require age verification, in the interest of protecting vulnerable groups, particularly children; 1. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to prepare a new comprehensive strategy on the rights of the child, ten years after the 2011 EU Agenda for the Rights of the Child; calls for adequate legislative and non-legislative proposals and binding and non-binding EU instruments to address the challenges that children face; 2. Stresses that a child is first and foremost a child, regardless of the child’s ethnic origin, gender, nationality or social and economic background, ability, or migration or residency status, and that the best interests of the child must be embedded in all EU policies, procedures and actions that concern children; 3. Reiterates its call on the Commission to include in the EU Strategy on the rights of the child all the provisions set out in Parliament’s resolution of 26 November 2019 on children’s rights on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; 4. Stresses that the EU Strategy must take a gender-balanced approach, integrating a gender perspective across all programming sectors, targeting the well-being and empowerment of girls, addressing their specific needs and recognising their rights; 5. Stresses that the Strategy should call on the Member States to allocate all the necessary resources for the effective implementation of the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child; calls on the Member States, furthermore, to address structural inequalities and prioritise public investment in education, healthcare, housing, family support and childcare, and to invest in high-quality universal services that reach all children; calls on Member States to strengthen the capacities of the social service workforce in order to support children and families facing special challenges and to support frontline operators in child protection services; 6. Calls on the Member States to guarantee the right to education for every child and to establish measures to combat and prevent early school leaving and to ensure gender-equitable access to quality,inclusive education from early childhood to adolescence, including for Romani children, children with disabilities, stateless and migrant children and those living in humanitarian emergency settings; 7. Emphasises that digital education should never permanently replace in-person learning, particularly where access to technologies is limited, and should only be used in times of great difficulty such as pandemics, or in a way that is complementary to in-person, face-to-face learning; calls on the Commission to make a thorough assessment of how the right to education has been affected by the crisis and to propose recommendations to Member States based on the results of this analysis; 8. Calls on the Member States to put in place specific ‘safe school’ operations, including providing hygiene supplies and sharing information in a child-friendly manner on handwashing and other hygiene measures during the COVID-19 pandemic; 9. Calls on the Member States to guarantee the right to inclusive education and to ensure access to comprehensive, age-appropriate information about sex and sexuality, and access to sexual and reproductive healthcare and relationship education; recalls that education in this area is necessary to ensure the full education and protection of children, in accordance with the latest report of the Commission; 10. Reiterates its call for the EU to step up its action to end all forms of violence and discrimination against children, including physical, sexual, economic and psychological violence, injury, abuse, neglect, mistreatment and exploitation perpetrated both online and offline, forced marriage, trafficking, abuse and exploitation of migrant children, torture, honour killing, FGM, incest, forced school leaving and the use of children as soldiers; stresses that, in order to ensure consistency as regards the protection of children from violence, trafficking and exploitation, all legislative and non-legislative initiatives concerning children’s rights have to take into account the EU Strategy on the rights of the child; calls on the Commission to publish a timetable concerning such proposals, while ensuring the implementation of its recommendations through an appropriate and efficient monitoring mechanism; 11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to end, in law and in practice, all child labour and all other forms of work likely to harm children’s health and safety; stresses the urgent need to tackle this issue, considering the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on the most vulnerable who have been affected by income shocks and a lack of access to social protection, as a consequence of which more children are being forced into work; calls, therefore, on the Commission to embed children’s rights in the upcoming EU sustainable governance framework, including the EU mandatory due diligence requirements, and to support third countries in eliminating child labour through cooperation programmes; recommends adopting cross-sectoral mandatory due diligence and ensuring that all EU policies are child-friendly by committing to undertake ex ante and ex post human rights controls; 12. Calls on the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) to intensify efforts to prevent and end grave violations against children affected by armed conflict; is deeply alarmed by the fact that the association of children with and their recruitment into armed groups often happens when children have no other options left to them; stresses the importance of advancing the children and armed conflicts (CAAC) agenda in the EU’s external action and counter-terrorism and security policies, in line with the EU action plan on human rights and democracy, integrating it into political dialogues, common security and defence policy (CSDP) missions and operations, security sector reforms and mediation; calls on the Commission and the VP/HR to set up special child protection officers and units in the EU Delegations; calls on the Member States to protect child nationals who may be detained for security-related offences or association with armed groups, and to facilitate their return to their country of origin for rehabilitation, reintegration and/or prosecution, as appropriate, in full compliance with international law; 13. Stresses that the protection of children from sexual exploitation and abuse is essential; deplores the fact that the Child Sexual Abuse Directive has not yet been implemented by 23 Member States; notes the Council of Europe’s emphasis on multi-stakeholder cooperation as the basis for the response against child sexual abuse (CSA) online, encompassing law enforcement authorities, national authorities, reporting mechanisms and service providers/industry; welcomes the Commission’s intention to propose a more long-lasting legislative framework to combat CSA in the first semester of 2021; reiterates its support for the creation of a European centre to prevent and counter child sexual abuse, a possibility which is currently being assessed by the Commission; welcomes the work of Europol in prevention, namely its awareness-raising campaigns to prevent child sexual exploitation online(33),(34); 14. Stresses that violence and abuse against children have increased to a worrying extent, while social services and protective institutions have become highly inaccessible during the COVID-19 pandemic; underlines the importance of developing preventive policies to counter violence against children at EU level; highlights the role of EU agencies and bodies in implementing the EU legislative framework concerning children’s rights; calls on the Commission to incorporate within the Strategy an EU action plan with standards and benchmarks for online service providers and technology companies to keep children safe online, beyond protecting them from being the subjects of illegal content and keeping them safe from harmful content; calls on the Member States that have not yet done so to criminalise online grooming and cyberstalking; 15. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the EU Strategy is consistent with priorities and legislative proposals laid out in the recent EU Strategy for a more effective fight against child sexual abuse, the EU Roma strategic framework on equality, inclusion and participation, the EU Gender Strategy and the EU LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025; 16. Believes that it is crucial to include in the EU Strategy concrete measures to invest in children in order to eradicate child poverty, including the establishment of a European Child Guarantee with appropriate resources; calls on the Commission to present its proposal for establishing the European Child Guarantee in the first quarter of 2021, in line with its commitment, and calls on the Member States to speed up its implementation and to invest all possible resources, including EU funds such as the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), Recovery Assistance for Cohesion and the Territories of Europe (ReactEU), the Recovery and Resilience Facility, the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), InvestEU, Erasmus+ and the Asylum and Migration Fund (AMF), in the fight against child poverty and social exclusion; highlights that Member States should establish both multi-annual national strategies for tackling child poverty and social exclusion and Child Guarantee national action plans; 17. Is concerned that in the context of the recovery from the COVID-19 crisis, the need to tackle child poverty will increase and that poverty will have an ever greater impact on children as the most vulnerable group among the most disadvantaged; urges that the EU Strategy be complemented by a comprehensive anti-poverty strategy, including measures to ensure decent and affordable housing and to tackle homelessness; recalls that any strategy to eradicate child poverty must take into account the reality of single parenthood and families with large numbers of children, given that single-parent households and households with many children are among the vulnerable groups; 18. Stresses the importance for the EU Strategy to introduce measures to ensure good access to healthcare for children and families, in line with the EU4Health programme, while taking into account difficulties that children have in accessing this right; 19. Stresses that it is important that the EU Strategy introduce measures to update the existing EU framework for action on mental health and well-being, which should be fully inclusive, in order to also meet the needs of children in vulnerable situations and from marginalised and racialised groups; calls on the Commission and the Member States to scale up investments in mental health and psycho-social services for children and families, particularly in low- and middle-income countries and in fragile humanitarian contexts; calls on the Member States to put mechanisms in place for the early detection of mental health issues; calls for the full integration of psycho-social and mental health support in national and transnational child protection systems, as well as for training of professionals on the specific needs of children; 20. Reiterates its call to ensure a child-friendly justice system with appropriate and inclusive proceedings which take into account the needs of all children; stresses the importance of ensuring the child’s right to be heard, to be assisted by a legal representative and to be fully informed in a child-friendly manner at all stages of proceedings in the justice system, in accordance with Articles 4 and 16 of Directive (EU) 2016/800 and with Articles 22 and 24 of Directive 2012/29/EU(35), including for children in migration, with a particular focus on unaccompanied minors; calls on the Member States to swiftly transpose and enforce the directives; calls on the Member States to ensure that child and family courts function as an essential service, continuing to hold emergency hearings and executing court orders for the care and protection of children who are at an immediate risk of neglect or abuse; recalls that specific safeguards should be put in place for children who come into contact with any judicial or related proceedings and stresses the need to train specialised staff; 21. Notes with regret that 11 out of 27 Member States did not provide access to online targeted information for children about the judicial system, such as interactive education on legal rights, and calls on all Member States to ensure that children are able to access this information in a child-friendly manner, taking into account any disabilities that might impair access(36); 22. Highlights the importance of the child’s best interests in cross-border family litigation; calls on the Member States to ensure that they fulfil their obligations as provided for in the Brussels II Bis Regulation(37), and for national authorities to recognise and enforce judgments delivered in another Member State in child-related cases, such as custodial judgments, access rights and maintenance obligations; emphasises the importance of close cooperation and efficient communication between the different national and local authorities involved in childcare proceedings; calls on the Member States to respect the right of children to see their parents despite the restrictive measures linked to the pandemic, as long as this does not endanger their safety and health; 23. Calls for the EU, its agencies and the Member States to end childhood statelessness both within and outside the EU, including by improving the capacity of frontline officials to identify, record and respond appropriately to statelessness in the migration and asylum context, promoting and ensuring universal access to birth registration and certification regardless of the parents’ status, including for LGBTQI+ families, introducing, improving and implementing legal safeguards to prevent childhood statelessness, and introducing and improving child rights-based statelessness determination procedures in order to meet international obligations towards stateless people in a migratory context, in line with the child’s best interests and their right to acquire nationality; 24. Stresses that measures must be included in the EU Strategy to improve the situation of children in migration and protect their interests both within and outside the EU, and at every stage of asylum procedures; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the implementation of safeguards and procedural rights for children in the Common European Asylum System, with a particular focus on swift family reunification processes in line with Directive 2003/86/EC, access to adequate reception conditions, social and medical care, the timely appointment of qualified legal representatives and guardians for unaccompanied minors, and access to child-friendly information; 25. Stresses the importance of the integration and inclusion of migrant and refugee children; reiterates the importance of removing all barriers to access to basic services and integration and inclusion measures, including psycho-social and mental health support, and of providing opportunities for children to increase social inclusion; calls on the Commission to take urgent action to raise awareness of the importance of changing narratives on migration and fighting negative stereotypes; 26. Takes the view that the Strategy should set as a priority the rights of children with regard to the deprivation of liberty in line with those outlined in the UN Global Study on Children Deprived of Liberty; urges the EU and the Member States to step up action to end the detention of children, particularly in the context of migration, and to work out community-based alternatives to detention that meet the best interests of the child and allow children to remain with their family members and/or guardians in a non-custodial context while their migration status is being resolved; 27. Takes the view that the EU Strategy should mainstream and promote the rights of vulnerable children across all policy areas and adopt an intersectional approach that takes into consideration the multiple forms of discrimination suffered by, among others, children from racialised groups, children with disabilities, children without or at risk of losing parental care, children in institutional care, LGBTIQ children, children from ethnic minority groups, migrant and refugee children, stateless and undocumented children, child victims of violence and sexual abuse, children directly or indirectly impacted by justice systems, children experiencing mental health problems, homeless children, girls and children of imprisoned parents; recalls that social services and family support are essential in order to avoid family separation and social exclusion; 28. Stresses that Romani children, in particular Romani girls, across Europe face the additional burden of racism as well as gender discrimination, which pushes them to the margins of their societies; underlines that low educational achievement, high rates of irregular attendance and early school leaving, non-inclusive school systems, high unemployment rates and poor employment opportunities deprive Romani boys and girls of realistic possibilities for integration and full participation in society; recalls the fact that a lack of personal documents hinders the ability of many Romani girls to access education, healthcare and other related services, and further recalls that increased racism and anti-Gypsyism affect the safety of Romani girls, making them increasingly vulnerable to social exclusion, exploitation, trafficking and violence(38); 29. Takes the view that the EU Strategy should propose an inclusive approach to protect the most vulnerable children in line with the Charter, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the General Comments of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, and the SDGs and their child-related targets, leaving no one behind; reiterates the importance of creating a safe environment for vulnerable children and their families through social investment and acknowledges that housing conditions for children and families should be recognised and integrated into the definition of vulnerability; stresses the importance of developing and strengthening integrated national and transnational child protection systems with resources, implementation and monitoring schemes; 30. Stresses that it is important that the EU address the physical (poor infrastructure and geography), technological (low-functionality devices), cultural (gender and social norms, cultural practices, and disability or minority status) and economic and social barriers to digital technologies across its internal and external policies; 31. Highlights the importance for the EU of investing in digital literacy in order to guarantee free access to digital literacy and digital education for all children, particularly children from underserved or marginalised communities, focusing on building their resilience and offering psychosocial support; notes that these investments could be made as part of the new skills agenda for Europe of the European Education Area, and could benefit from of EU development and humanitarian funds; points out that investments in ensuring that education systems can provide digital education, literacy and skills to all children are key to promoting children’s understanding of digital technologies, overcoming inequalities, improving digital inclusion and empowering and protecting children and their rights online and offline; recalls that the development of digital education, literacy and skills should equip children to fight against the dangers of the digital space as well as to manage their responsibilities when interacting within it; 32. Calls on the Commission to include the voices of children by establishing formal mechanisms for dialogue and consultation and ensuring their full and meaningful participation in decision-making, with a particular focus on elevating the voices of the most vulnerable, such as girls, children living in poverty, displaced and migrant children and those with disabilities; 33. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to put in place specific mechanisms to assess the impact of COVID-19 on all children, in order to collect data to better design national action plans to tackle the issues affecting children based on children’s views; calls on the Member States to establish a children’s rights approach when defining their national recovery plans; 34. Calls on the Council to adopt conclusions on the EU Strategy setting out a new mandatory framework for the EU institutions and the Member States, following the example of the European Consensus for Development and ensuring the implementation of well-designed, comprehensive and properly funded integrated national and transnational child protection systems; 35. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the rights of the child are prioritised and mainstreamed in all internal and external EU policies, actions and programmes that affect children directly or indirectly, and to ensure consistency and coherence across all different instruments; 36. Calls on the Commission to develop a child marker in the allocation of its budgets in order to allow EU institutions and partners to measure and monitor EU investment in children through the collection of disaggregated and specific data, with a view to identifying gaps between policy and financial commitments, thereby providing an estimate of the scale of EU support for children’s rights; 37. Calls on the Member States to work out an annual action plan to implement the provisions set out in the EU Strategy on the rights of the child and to integrate their national action plans into the EU recovery and resilience plan; 38. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that the EU Strategy on the rights of the child is adequately financed, making sure that the EU internal and external funding instruments, as well as national budgets, support the implementation of the priorities set out in the Strategy; 39. Calls on the Commission to ensure the proper monitoring of the implementation of the EU Strategy by the Member States; recalls the need to ensure rights-based meaningful and inclusive child participation throughout the whole process of the creation and the implementation of the Strategy, and to use benchmarks and indicators to better monitor progress; 40. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Legal notice - Privacy policy |