19.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/102

—

having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents,

—

having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (COM(2008)0229),

—

having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (COM(2011)0137),

—

having regard to Article 15 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to its position of 15 December 2011 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2012 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (2010-2011) (2),

—

having regard to the questions to the Council and Commission on the deadlock on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 on access to documents (O-00049/2013 O-00050/2013, O-00051/2013, O-00052/2013, O-00053/2013, O-00054/2013, O-00058/2013 and O-00059/2013),

—

having regard to the Commission statement of 21 May 2013 on the deadlock on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001,

—

having regard to Rule 110(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A.

whereas transparency is an essential tool to enable citizens to participate in the EU decision-making process as well as in securing the accountability of the European institutions to their citizens and thereby increasing their engagement and trust;

B.

whereas the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon further enhanced EU transparency obligations and enshrined access to documents as a fundamental right;

C.

whereas Parliament has on several occasions called for enhanced transparency in the legislative procedure, including transparency in respect of Council working groups, publication of legal opinions in legislative procedures, and greater transparency in the ‘trilogues’;

D.

whereas Parliament has also regretted the lack of transparency in EU agencies, in international negotiations and in the Commission’s dialogue with Member States, notably when fundamental rights or the interests of European citizens are at stake (3);

E.

whereas the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and decisions of the European Ombudsman have substantially influenced understanding of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; whereas such case-law and decisions, especially as regards the use of non-recognition grounds in a legislative procedure, such as Turco and Access Info, should be reflected in the legislation;

F.

whereas Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 is perceived by EU citizens and the EU public as a key piece of legislation which provides the tools for proper oversight of EU actions; whereas application of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 has still to be improved, as shown by several cases dealt with by the Ombudsman;

G.

whereas in 2008 the Commission proposed a recast of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, and whereas it did not withdraw this proposal following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon; whereas Parliament duly informed the Commission about the inappropriateness of the use of the recast procedure;

H.

whereas in 2011 the Commission made an additional proposal which only implicitly extends the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 to all EU institutions, offices, agencies and bodies; whereas Parliament merged the 2008 and 2011 procedures into a single procedure;

I.

whereas Parliament adopted its first-reading position on 15 December 2011, and trilogues were started with the Danish Presidency in the first half of 2012; whereas the Commission did not agree with the proposed possible compromises, which is the main reason for a standstill which has lasted more than a year;

J.

whereas the Cypriot and Irish presidencies were unable to unblock the matter in the Council and start further negotiations because of resistance from the Commission, which triggers a unanimity requirement in the Council on certain points;

K.

whereas, given the enhanced transparency obligations included in the Treaties following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, any revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should not lower the current level of transparency;

L.

whereas a failure to agree on a new version of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 would send the wrong signal about the nature of the EU to its citizens, and whereas such a failure would undermine the legitimacy of EU decision-making, especially in the light of the fast-approaching key European elections;

1.

Strongly reaffirms the importance of the fundamental right of access to information and documents, of transparency and openness of institutions and of their decision-making processes, which are pillars of democracy and can bring citizens closer to the EU;

2.

Calls on all EU institutions, offices, bodies and agencies to fully implement Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;

3.

Considers that amending Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should be a priority for all the EU institutions, and regrets the deadlock that has been created; asks all the EU institutions to work together to find a way out as soon as possible;

4.

Reaffirms its commitment to revising Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, which, taken overall, should give EU citizens wider and improved access to EU documents;

5.

Calls on the Commission to engage fully, at the political and the technical level, in the amending and ‘Lisbonising’ of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, or to take any appropriate measures to break the deadlock;

6.

Calls on the Council immediately to restart debates on Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, to adopt its first-reading position and to continue negotiations;

7.

Reaffirms its above mentioned first-reading position as adopted on 15 December 2011 (4) as the starting position for negotiations and insists that an amended text, as an absolute minimum, and in accordance with the Treaty requirements, should: explicitly extend the scope to all EU institutions, offices and agencies; enhance legislative transparency, including access to legislative legal opinions, whereby any use of exceptions in the legislative procedure should constitute an exemption from the general rule of legislative transparency; clarify the relationship between transparency and data protection; include the Aarhus Convention; consider the current broad definition of a document as a minimum basis for further development; ensure appropriate access to documents and transparency in relation to international negotiations and agreements; provide for financial transparency of EU funds; not introduce any block exemptions;

8.

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