22.9.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/1

22.9.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/2

—

having regard to the preamble of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular its second and its fourth to seventh indents,

—

having regard, inter alia, to Article 2, the second indent of Article 3(3), and Articles 6, 7 and 9 TEU,

—

having regard to Article 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular paragraph 7 thereof,

—

having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7 December 2000 (‘the Charter’), which was proclaimed on 12 December 2007 in Strasbourg and entered into force with the Treaty of Lisbon in December 2009,

—

having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948,

—

having regard to the UN treaties on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms and the jurisprudence of the UN treaty bodies,

—

having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which was adopted in New York on 13 December 2006 and ratified by the EU on 23 December 2010,

—

having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted in New York on 20 November 1989,

—

having regard to the following General Comments of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: No 7 (2005) on implementing child rights in early childhood, No 9 (2006) on the rights of children with disabilities, No 10 (2007) on children’s rights in juvenile justice, No 12 (2009) on the right of the child to be heard, No 13 (2011) on the right of the child to freedom from all forms of violence and No 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration,

—

having regard to the 1979 UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and to the Beijing Platform for Action, to its resolutions of 25 February 2014 with recommendations to the Commission on combating violence against women (1) and of 6 February 2014 on the Commission communication entitled ‘Towards the elimination of female genital mutilation’ (2), and to the Council conclusions of 5 June 2014 on preventing and combating all forms of violence against women and girls, including female genital mutilation,

—

having regard to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the conventions, recommendations, resolutions and reports of the Parliamentary Assembly, the Committee of Ministers, the Commissioner for Human Rights and the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe,

—

having regard to the report by Cephas Lumina, Independent Expert of the Human Rights Council on the effects of foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States on the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights (Addendum, Mission to Greece, UN A/HRC/25/50/Add.1),

—

having regard to the report by the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, published in April 2013, entitled ‘Management of the external borders of the European Union and its impact on the human rights of migrants’,

—

having regard to the UN Human Rights Council resolution of 26 June 2014 calling for the establishment of an open-ended intergovernmental working group with the aim of drawing up ‘an international legally binding instrument on transnational corporations and other business enterprises with respect to human rights’,

—

having regard to the strategic guidelines for establishing an area of freedom, security and justice adopted by the Council of Europe on 27 June 2014,

—

having regard to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention),

—

having regard to the European Social Charter, as revised in 1996, and the case law of the European Committee of Social Rights,

—

having regard to the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages,

—

having regard to Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin (3),

—

having regard to the Council recommendation of 9 December 2013 on effective Roma integration measures in the Member States (4),

—

having regard to the package of directives on Procedural Defence Rights in the EU (5),

—

having regard to Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law (6),

—

having regard to the Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy and its accompanying Action Plan, adopted by the Council on 25 June 2012,

—

having regard to Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (7),

—

having regard to the conclusions of the Council of the European Union and the Member States meeting within the Council on ensuring respect for the rule of law, adopted on 16 December 2014,

—

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 (8),

—

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 (9),

—

having regard to Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA (10),

—

having regard to Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (11),

—

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, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (12),

—

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 (13),

—

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 decisions and case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), and the case law of national constitutional courts, which use the Charter as a reference for interpreting national law,

—

having regard to the political guidelines for the new European Commission presented by President Juncker to Parliament on 15 July 2014,

—

having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation) (COM(2012)0011),

—

having regard to the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and the free movement of such data (COM(2012)0010),

—

having regard to the EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012-2016 (COM(2012)0286), in particular the provisions on financing the development of guidelines on child protection systems and on the exchange of best practices,

—

having regard to Commission Recommendation 2013/112/EU of 20 February 2013 entitled ‘Investing in children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage’ (14),

—

having regard to the Guidelines to promote and protect the enjoyment of all human rights by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) persons, adopted by the Foreign Affairs Council on 24 June 2013,

—

having regard to the Commission communication on an EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 (COM(2011)0173) and the European Council conclusions of 24 June 2011,

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Steps forward in implementing national Roma integration strategies’ (COM(2013)0454),

—

having regard to the Commission’s EU Anti-corruption Report (COM(2014)0038),

—

having regard to the proposal for a Council directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (COM(2008)0426),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2013 on the progress made in the implementation of the National Roma Integration Strategies (15),

—

having regard to its resolution of 4 February 2014 on the EU Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity (16),

—

having regard to its resolutions on gender equality,

—

having regard to its resolution of 14 September 2011 on an EU Homelessness Strategy (17),

—

having regard to the US Senate report on CIA detention and interrogation programmes,

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 September 2013 on the situation of unaccompanied minors in the EU (18),

—

having regard to its resolutions on fundamental rights and human rights, in particular the latest dated 27 February 2014 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (2012) (19),

—

having regard to its resolutions on migration, in particular the latest dated 17 December 2014 on the situation in the Mediterranean and the need for a holistic EU approach to migration (20),

—

having regard to its resolution of 8 June 2005 on the protection of minorities and anti-discrimination policies in an enlarged Europe (21),

—

having regard to its resolution of 27 November 2014 on the 25th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (22),

—

having regard to its resolution of 4 July 2013 on the US National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ privacy (23), in which it instructed its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs to conduct an in-depth inquiry into the matter, and to its resolution of 12 March 2014 on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs (24),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 February 2015 on the US Senate report on the use of torture by the CIA (25),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 September 2013 on endangered European languages and linguistic diversity in the European Union (26),

—

having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2014 on seeking an opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility with the Treaties of the Agreement between Canada and the European Union on the transfer and processing of Passenger Name Record data (27),

—

having regard to its resolutions of 11 September 2012 (28) and 10 October 2013 (29) on alleged transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA,

—

having regard to its resolutions on the Guantanamo Bay detention centre,

—

having regard to its resolution of 21 May 2013 on the EU Charter: standard settings for media freedom across the EU (30),

—

having regard to Opinion 2/2013 delivered by the CJEU regarding the draft agreement on accession of the EU to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR),

—

having regard to the judgment of the CJEU of 8 April 2014 in joined cases C-293/12 and C-594/12 (Digital Rights Ireland and Seitlinger and Others), which annulled Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC,

—

having regard to the hearing of Frans Timmermans before Parliament on 7 October 2014, and to his appearance at its sitting of 11 February 2015,

—

having regard to the hearing of Dimitris Avramopoulos before Parliament on 30 September 2014,

—

having regard to the annual conference of the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) on 10 November 2014 on the theme of ‘Fundamental Rights and Migration to the EU’ and in particular to FRA focus paper ‘Legal entry channels to the EU for persons in need of international protection: a toolbox’,

—

having regard to the work, annual reports and studies of the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) and of the FRA and to the FRA’s large-scale surveys on discrimination and hate crime against Jews in the EU Member States, on violence against women in the EU and on LGBT persons’ experiences of discrimination, violence and harassment,

—

having regard to the contributions by the NGOs participating in the FRA Fundamental Rights Platform,

—

having regard to the reports and research carried out by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on the subject of human rights and research requested in that field by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, in particular the study by Policy Department C on the impact of the crisis on fundamental rights across the Member States of the EU,

—

having regard to its studies on the impact of the crisis on fundamental rights in the Member States,

—

having regard to the Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (the ‘Paris Principles’), annexed to UN General Assembly resolution 48/134,

—

having regard to its resolution of 3 July 2013 on the situation of fundamental rights: standards and practices in Hungary (pursuant to the European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2012)’ (31),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on the Strategy for the effective implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights by the European Union (COM(2010)0573) and the Operational Guidance on taking account of Fundamental Rights in Commission Impact Assessments (SEC(2011)0567),

—

having regard to the Commission communication on a new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law (COM(2014)0158) and the Council conclusions of 16 December 2014 entitled ‘Ensuring respect for the Rule of Law’,

—

having regard to the 2013 Commission Report on the Application of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (COM(2014)0224), and to the accompanying working documents,

—

having regard to the 2013 Commission Report on EU citizenship — EU citizens: your rights, your future (COM(2013)0269),

—

having regard to the Commission Report on the ‘implementation of the EU framework for national Roma integration strategies’ (COM(2014)0209), and to the Council recommendation of 9 December 2013 on ‘Effective Roma integration measures in the Member States’,

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and the Committee on Petitions (A8-0230/2015),

A.

whereas European integration came about in part to prevent a recurrence of the tragic consequences of the Second World War and the persecution and repression by the Nazi regime, and also to avoid any decline or reversal of democracy and the rule of law by promoting, respecting and protecting human rights;

B.

whereas respect for and promotion of human rights, fundamental freedoms, democracy and the values and principles enshrined in EU treaties and international human rights instruments (the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ECHR, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, etc.) are obligations incumbent on the Union and its Member States and must be central to European integration;

C.

whereas those rights must be guaranteed for everyone living in the EU, including in response to abuse and acts of violence by authorities at whatever level;

D.

whereas, under Article 2 TEU, the EU is founded on respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, values which are shared by all the Member States and which must be upheld by the EU, and by each individual Member State, in all their policies, at both internal and external level; whereas, under Article 17 TEU, the Commission must ensure application of the Treaties;

E.

whereas, under Article 6 TEU, the EU has a responsibility to uphold and enforce fundamental rights in any action it takes, regardless of its powers in the area concerned; whereas Member States are also encouraged to do the same;

F.

whereas revision of the EU Treaties is necessary in order to strengthen the protection of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights;

G.

whereas in accordance with the preamble of the TEU, the Member States have confirmed their attachment to social rights as defined in the European Social Charter; whereas Article 151 TFEU also contains an explicit reference to fundamental social rights such as those set out in the European Social Charter;

H.

whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union became a fully fledged component of the Treaties when the Treaty of Lisbon came into force, and is therefore now legally binding on the institutions, agencies and other bodies of the EU and on the Member States when EU legislation is applied; whereas a genuine fundamental rights culture must be developed, fostered and strengthened in the EU institutions, but also in the Member States, in particular when they apply EU law domestically and in their relations with non-EU countries;

I.

whereas Articles 2 and 3 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union recognise the right to life and the right to integrity of the person;

J.

whereas Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union prohibits all forms of inhuman or degrading treatment;

K.

whereas the importance of social fundamental rights is acknowledged in Articles 8, 9, 10, 19 and 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as it is in the case law of the CJEU, thus underscoring the fact that those rights, and in particular trade union rights, the right to strike, right of association and right of assembly, must be given the same safeguards as the other fundamental rights acknowledged by the Charter;

L.

whereas Article 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union obliges the Union to ‘respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity’, and Article 21 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of language and/or being a member of a national minority;

M.

whereas Article 33 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union guarantees protection of the family in the legal, economic and social spheres;

N.

whereas Articles 37 and 38 of the Charter recognise the right to a high level of environmental protection intrinsically linked to the deployment of the policies of the Union;

O.

whereas Member States cannot reduce the level of guarantees offered in their own constitutions in respect of certain rights on the pretext that the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union or other instruments of EU law provide for a lower level of protection;

P.

whereas it is recognised that national authorities (judicial authorities, law enforcement bodies and administrations) are key actors in giving concrete effect to the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Charter;

Q.

whereas establishing an area of freedom, security and justice as described in Title V TFEU requires the EU and each Member State to uphold fundamental rights in full;

R.

whereas human beings who are citizens or residents are placed at centre stage in the EU and whereas the personal, civil, political, economic and social rights recognised by the Charter not only have the aim of protecting European citizens and residents against any interference, abuse or violence but are also preconditions for ensuring their full and untroubled personal development;

S.

whereas the rule of law is the backbone of European liberal democracy, and is one of the founding principles of the EU stemming from the common constitutional traditions of all Member States;

T.

whereas the way the rule of law is implemented at national level plays a key role in ensuring mutual trust among Member States and their legal systems, hence it is of vital importance to establish an area of freedom, security and justice as described in Title V TFEU;

U.

whereas respecting the rule of law is a prerequisite for the protection of fundamental rights and is of particular importance within the EU since it is also a prerequisite for upholding all rights and obligations deriving from the Treaties and from international law;

V.

whereas the EU and its Member States are engaged in a global process of moving towards new sustainable development objectives under which human rights are universal, indivisible and inalienable;

W.

whereas the implementation of these values and principles must also be based on effective monitoring of respect for the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Charter, for example when legislative proposals are being drawn up;

X.

whereas the EU is undergoing a period of serious economic and financial crisis, the impact of which, in combination with certain measures, including drastic budget cuts, implemented to address it in some Member States, is negatively affecting the living conditions of EU citizens — increasing unemployment, poverty levels, inequalities and precarious working conditions, and limiting access to and quality of services — and hence the wellbeing of citizens;

Y.

whereas almost one third of petitions received by Parliament relate to alleged breaches of fundamental rights referred to in the Charter, touching on issues such as citizenship, the four freedoms, employment, economic circumstances, environmental and consumer protection, justice systems, voting rights and democratic participation, transparency in decision-making, disability, children’s rights, access to education or language rights; whereas some of those petitions raise questions related to health issues and access to healthcare and health services, but also questions related to the right to work as a direct consequence of the economic crisis; whereas petitions are usually the earliest indicators of the situation of fundamental rights in the Member States;

Z.

whereas the EU operates on the basis of the presumption and mutual trust that the Member States conform with democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, as enshrined in the ECHR and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, notably in relation to the development of an area of freedom, security and justice and the mutual recognition principle;

AA.

whereas being unemployed, poor or socially marginalised has major consequences as regards gaining and exercising fundamental rights and means that people in such vulnerable positions must continue to have access to basic services, in particular welfare services and financial services;

AB.

whereas, following recent terrorist attacks on EU territory, certain anti-terrorism policies and measures are likely to compromise fundamental rights and freedoms in the EU; whereas it is essential to ensure that a balance is maintained between safeguarding fundamental freedoms and rights and strengthening security; whereas the EU and its Member States have the duty to protect European citizens, while ensuring respect for their fundamental rights and freedoms in the design and operation of security policies; whereas necessity and proportionality must be the overriding principles in this area so as to prevent policy actions from infringing civil liberties;

AC.

whereas thousands of lives are being lost in the Mediterranean, in an unprecedented manner, carrying a huge responsibility to the EU to act to save lives, stop human traffickers, provide legal avenues for migrants and assist and protect asylum seekers and refugees;

AD.

whereas almost 3 500 migrants died or went missing in 2014 while attempting to reach Europe, bringing the total number of dead and missing over the last 20 years to nearly 30 000; whereas, according to the International Organisation for Migration, the migratory route towards Europe has become the world's most dangerous route for migrants;

AE.

whereas about one thousand asylum applications a year relate directly to genital mutilation;

AF.

whereas the right to asylum is guaranteed under the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees (Geneva Convention) and the protocol of 31 January 1967;

AG.

whereas the manifestations of extreme nationalism, racism, xenophobia and intolerance have not yet disappeared from our communities; whereas on the contrary, especially after the recent terrorist attacks they appear to be on the rise in many Member States, affecting both traditional minorities and new national minority communities;

AH.

whereas under Article 49 TEU any European state which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union; whereas compliance with the Copenhagen criteria is an essential precondition for EU accession; whereas the obligations incumbent on candidate countries under the Copenhagen criteria are not only basic pre-accession requirements, but must also continue to apply after a country has joined the EU, on the basis of Article 2 TEU; whereas in light of this, all Member States should be assessed on an ongoing basis in order to verify their continued compliance with the EU's basic values of respect for fundamental rights, democratic institutions and the rule of law; whereas, in addition, a graduated corrective mechanism needs to be introduced so as bridge the gap between political dialogue and the ‘nuclear option’ of Article 7 TEU and to address the ‘Copenhagen dilemma’ within the current Treaties;

AI.

whereas, since there are no clear and common benchmarks, challenging the situation as regards the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights within a Member State is itself continually called into question in the light of political and institutional considerations; whereas in collusion with EU institutions, because there are no binding procedures, in too many instances there is permanent inertia and the Treaties and European values are not observed;

AJ.

whereas the right to petition has established a tight bond between the EU’s citizens and the European Parliament; whereas the European Citizens’ Initiative has introduced a new direct link between the EU’s citizens and the EU institutions and can enhance the development of fundamental rights and citizens’ rights; whereas citizens’ rights include the right to petition as a means of citizens upholding their own fundamental rights, as laid down in Article 44 of the Charter and Article 227 TFEU;

AK.

whereas women still face many forms of discrimination in the EU and are often victims of violence and abuse, especially of a sexual nature;

AL.

whereas violence against women is the most widespread violation of fundamental rights in the EU and throughout the world, and whereas it affects all levels of society, regardless of age, education, income, social position and country of origin or residence, and represents a major barrier to equality between women and men;

AM.

whereas, according to the findings of a survey conducted in 2014 by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, most women who have been subjected to violence do not report what has happened to the police;

AN.

whereas sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHRs) are grounded in basic human rights and are essential elements of human dignity (32); whereas the denial of life-saving abortion amounts to a serious breach of human rights;

AO.

whereas the trafficking and sexual exploitation of women and children are a clear violation of human rights, human dignity and the fundamental principles of law and democracy; whereas today women are more vulnerable to such risks owing to increased economic uncertainty and the higher risk of unemployment and poverty;

AP.

whereas violence against women as a form of gender discrimination is not explicitly included in European law, and is present as a concept in only three national legal systems (Spain, Sweden and Germany), the result being that it is not seen as a substantive equality issue; whereas the Member States adopt an ad hoc approach to defining violence against women and gender-based violence, with definitions varying widely in national legislation, thus meaning data are not comparable;

AQ.

whereas the Member States are not immune from the evil practice of genital mutilation, to which a reported 500 000 individuals have fallen victim in the EU, with a further 180 000 at risk;

AR.

whereas numerous violations of fundamental rights still occur in the EU and the Member States, as evidenced, for example, by the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and as pointed out in reports by the Commission, the FRA, NGOs, the Council of Europe and the UN, such as violation of the right to freedom of assembly and expression of civil society organisations, institutional discrimination against LGBTI persons through marriage bans and anti-propaganda legislation, and the remaining high levels of discrimination and hate crime motivated by racism, xenophobia, religious intolerance, or bias against a person's disability, sexual orientation or gender identity; whereas the responses of the Commission, the Council and Member States are falling short of what is required, given the gravity of these recurrent violations;

AS.

whereas societies in which fundamental rights are fully implemented and safeguarded have more chances to develop a dynamic and competitive economy;

AT.

whereas Roma, the largest ethnic minority in Europe, continue to be the victims of severe discrimination, racist attacks, hate speech, poverty and exclusion;

AU.

whereas the European external action is based on the same principles that underpin the establishment and development of the EU, that is, democracy, solidarity, human dignity and all fundamental rights; whereas specific human rights guidelines have been developed in the external policies of the EU, but this has not been the case in its internal policies, which could lead to allegations of double standards; whereas it is essential that the promotion of fundamental rights by the EU as part of its external action be paralleled by a robust and systematic internal policy of monitoring compliance with fundamental rights within the EU itself;

AV.

whereas personal data protection provisions should uphold the principles of purpose, necessity and proportionality, including in the context of negotiations and the conclusion of international agreements, as pointed up by the European Court of Justice judgment of 6 April 2014 quashing Directive 2006/24/EC and by the opinions of the European Data Protection Supervisor;

AW.

whereas the rights to respect for private and family life and to protection of personal data are enshrined in the Charter and are therefore an integral component of primary EU law;

AX.

whereas new technologies can adversely affect fundamental rights, in particular the right to privacy and the right to protection of personal data which are guaranteed under Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter;

AY.

whereas mass access to the internet has opened up still further opportunities for physical and psychological abuse of women, including online grooming;

AZ.

whereas the rapid pace of change in the digital world (including increased use of the internet, apps and social networks) necessitates more effective safeguards for personal data and privacy in order to guarantee confidentiality and protection;

BA.

whereas fundamental freedoms, human rights and equal opportunities must be ensured for all citizens of the EU, including persons belonging to national and linguistic minorities;

BB.

whereas in Europe, according to the WHO, at least 850 children aged under 15 die from maltreatment each year;

BC.

whereas according to an FRA survey concerning discrimination and hate crime against LGBTI persons, in addition to the discrimination and violence of which they had been victims, almost half of all the LGBTI respondents ‘believed that offensive language about LGBT people by politicians was widespread in their country of residence’;

BD.

whereas LGBTI people are victims of institutional discrimination either because civil unions are prohibited or because there are laws prohibiting assertion of sexual preference;

BE.

whereas people with a disability face many different forms of discrimination which prevent them from exercising their fundamental rights to the full;

BF.

whereas for people with disabilities the rate of poverty is 70 % higher than the average, partly owing to limited access to employment;

BG.

whereas secularism and neutrality offer the most effective guarantees that the religious communities which form part of any given state do not suffer discrimination;

BH.

whereas freedom of the press and freedom to operate for civil society groups such as NGOs are central to democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; whereas this freedom has been jeopardised by the adoption of laws or by direct intervention by the authorities in a number of Member States;

BI.

whereas the Charter of Fundamental Rights states that the elderly have the right ‘to lead a life of dignity and independence and to participate in social and cultural life’;

BJ.

whereas, while punishments proportionate to the crimes committed do act as a deterrent against fundamental rights violations, the primary goal must remain to prevent crime (by means of education and cultural measures) rather than to take action after the event;

BK.

whereas the effectiveness of specialised institutions such as national human rights institutions or equality bodies is important to help citizens better enforce their fundamental rights to the extent that Member States apply EU law;

BL.

whereas the right to vote and stand as a candidate in local elections and European Parliament elections in one’s Member State of residence is recognised in Articles 39 and 40 of the Charter; whereas exercising the right of mobility should not hamper this right;

BM.

having regard to the weakness of the response by the Commission and the Member States to the revelations by Edward Snowden of massive spying operations using the internet and telecommunications networks as part of the NSA-PRISM programme targeting European countries also, and concerned their failure to enforce measures to protect European citizens or third-country nationals living in Europe;

1.

Considers it essential to guarantee that the common European values listed in Article 2 TEU are upheld in full, in both European and national legislation, public policies and their implementation, while fully respecting the subsidiarity principle;

2.

Calls on the Member States to ensure that all EU legislation, including the economic and financial adjustment programmes, is implemented in accordance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Social Charter (Article 151 TFEU);

3.

Notes that Article 6 TEU requires the Union to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights; notes Opinion 2/2013 of the Court of Justice of the European Union; calls on the Commission and Council to put in place the necessary instruments to ensure that the aforementioned obligation — enshrined in the Treaties — is accomplished without undue delay; considers that this needs to be done on the basis of full transparency, as it will provide an additional mechanism for increasing genuine respect and enforcing the protection of individuals against breaches of their fundamental rights, including the right to an effective remedy, and making the European institutions more accountable for their actions or failings regarding fundamental rights;

4.

Welcomes the appointment of the first Vice-President of the Commission with powers relating to respect for the rule of law and the Charter, and takes note of his commitment to properly enforce the existing framework; expects to see an internal strategy on fundamental rights adopted in the near future, in close cooperation with the other institutions and in consultation with a broad representation of civil society and other interested parties; considers that the strategy should be based on Articles 2, 6 and 7 TEU and should be consistent with the principles and objectives embedded in Articles 8 and 10 TFEU; deplores the lack of political will to invoke Article 7 TEU against Member States responsible for breaches of fundamental rights to penalise them and operate as a deterrent;

5.

Underlines the need for the full use of existing mechanisms to ensure that the fundamental rights and values of the Union referred to in Article 2 TEU and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights are respected, protected and promoted; stresses that in this regard all the instruments currently provided for in the Treaties need to be urgently applied and implemented;

6.

Stresses that full use must be made of the existing mechanisms, with objective evaluations and investigations being launched and infringement proceedings being taken out if a case is well-grounded;

7.

Underlines the need for possible treaty changes with a view to further strengthening the protection of fundamental rights in the EU Treaties;

8.

Notes the Commission's communication on a new EU framework to strengthen the rule of law, which represents a first attempt to remedy the existing shortcomings with regard to preventing and resolving fundamental rights violations and breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Member States; notes the Commission's intention to keep Parliament and the Council regularly informed of the progress made at each stage; considers, however, that the proposed framework may not be a sufficient or effective deterrent when it comes to preventing and resolving fundamental rights violations in Member States, as the Commission has presented this framework in the form of a non-binding communication that does not specify when the framework must be activated;

9.

Calls on the Commission to implement and further improve the said framework with the aim of:

10.

Urges the Commission to ensure that the abovementioned internal strategy is accompanied by a clear and detailed new mechanism, soundly based on international and European law and embracing all the values protected by Article 2 TEU, in order to ensure coherence with the Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy already applied in EU external relations and render the European institutions and Member States accountable for their actions and omissions with regard to fundamental rights; believes that this mechanism should enable the monitoring of the compliance of all EU Member States with regard to fundamental rights and provide for a systematic and institutionalised dialogue in case of breach of fundamental rights by one or several Member States; considers that in order to make full use of the Treaties' provisions the Commission should:

11.

Welcomes the fact that the Council will hold debates on the rule of law; considers, however, that such debates are not the most effective way to resolve any non-compliance with the fundamental values of the European Union; regrets the fact that Parliament is neither informed nor involved in the organisation of these debates; calls on the Council to base its debates on the results of annual and specific reports by the European Commission, the European Parliament, civil society, the Council of Europe and its Venice Commission and other parties involved, institutional or otherwise;

12.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to conduct investigations into any allegations of infringements of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, and to follow up those allegations should they be proven; urges the Commission, in particular, to initiate infringement proceedings should any Member State be suspected of acting in breach of those rights;

13.

Calls on the Commission to give more priority to the preparation of the Union's accession to the European Social Charter, signed in Turin on 18 October 1961 and revised in Strasbourg on 3 May 1996;

14.

Calls on the Member States to establish and strengthen National human rights Institutions in line with the ‘Paris principles’, so as to ensure the independent promotion and protection of human rights on the national level;

15.

Calls for a guarantee of better coordination and consistency between the activities of Parliament, the Council of Europe, the FRA and the EIGE;

16.

Expresses concern at the alarming increase in the number of violations of fundamental rights in the EU, in particular in the areas of immigration and asylum, discrimination and intolerance — especially towards certain communities — and in the number of instances of attacks being carried out and of pressure being exerted on the NGOs which defend the rights of these groups and communities; notes Member States’ unwillingness to ensure that these fundamental rights and freedoms are observed, in particular as regards Roma people, women, the LGBTI community, asylum seekers, immigrants and other vulnerable groups;

17.

Calls on the Council to find common ground on the precise content of the principles and standards stemming from the rule of law that vary at national level, and to consider the already existing definition of the rule of law of the European Court of Justice as a starting- point for debate, including: legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic process for enacting laws; legal certainty; prohibition of arbitrariness of the executive powers; independent and impartial courts; effective judicial review including respect for fundamental rights; and equality before the law;

18.

Recalls that respecting the rule of law is a prerequisite for the protection of fundamental rights and that security measures should not compromise them, in line with Article 52 of the Charter; also recalls that under Article 6 of the Charter everyone has the right to liberty and security of person;

19.

Calls on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to ensure that fundamental rights and principles — as laid down, in particular, in the Treaties, the Charter and the European Convention on Human Rights — are embedded in internal security policies and measures from the outset, as suggested in the FRA Focus paper ‘Embedding fundamental rights in the security agenda’; urges the EU and the Member States to mainstream social inclusion and non-discrimination measures in future internal security strategies;

20.

Calls on the Commission, with the support of the FRA, to strengthen awareness-raising, education and training measures and programmes with regard to fundamental rights; these programmes should aim to establish cohesion and trust between all social partners and involve civil society organisations, national human rights institutions and national equality and anti-discrimination offices;

21.

Stresses that the role of the Commission as the guardian of the Treaties is not limited to ensuring that legislation is transposed by the Member States, but also extends to the full and correct application of laws, in particular with a view to protecting citizens’ fundamental rights; regrets the effective limitation of the scope of application of the Charter due to an excessively restrictive interpretation of its Article 51, read as preventing it from covering the enforcement of EU law; is of the opinion that this approach should be revised to meet EU citizens’ expectations in relation to their fundamental rights; recalls that the expectations of citizens go beyond the strict interpretation of the Charter and that the objective should be to render those rights as effective as possible; regrets, therefore, that the Commission pleads lack of competence in numerous replies to petitions complaining of a possible breach of fundamental rights; in this framework, calls for the establishment of a mechanism for the monitoring, systematic evaluation and issuing of recommendations, to foster overall compliance with fundamental values in the Member States;

22.

Recalls the crucial importance of the timely and correct transposition and implementation of EU law, especially when it affects or develops fundamental rights;

23.

Recalls that freedom of expression, information and the media is fundamental to ensuring democracy and the rule of law; strongly condemns violence, pressure and threats against journalists and the media, including in relation to the disclosure of their sources and information about breaches of fundamental rights by governments and states; calls on Member States to refrain from applying measures to impede those freedoms; reiterates its call on the Commission to review and amend the audiovisual media services directive along the lines indicated by Parliament in its resolution of 22 May 2013;

24.

Stresses that public, independent, free, diverse and pluralist media, together with journalists, both online and offline, are a fundamental building block of democracy; believes that media ownership and management should not be concentrated; stresses, in this regard, that transparency of media ownership is crucial for the monitoring of investments that could influence the information provided; calls for the development of adequate and fair economic rules, in order to also guarantee online media pluralism; calls on the Commission to develop an action plan to assure that all media comply with minimum standards of independence and quality;

25.

Expresses its concern over the increasing repressive measures in some Member States against social movements and demonstrations, freedom of assembly and freedom of speech, particularly regarding the disproportionate use of force against peaceful demonstrators, and the small number of police and judicial investigations in this area; calls on the Member States to protect freedom of assembly and not to adopt measures that call into question or even criminalise the exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms, such as the rights to demonstrate and strike or the rights of assembly and association and freedom of expression; expresses great concern at the national laws in several Member States impacting on fundamental rights in public spaces and restricting the right of assembly; calls on the Commission to monitor and address the serious interferences with fundamental rights caused by national laws setting up restrictions in public spaces on security grounds;

26.

Notes that instances of terrorism have led the EU and its Member States to intensify anti-terrorist and counter-radicalisation measures; urges the EU and national authorities to adopt such measures in full respect of the principles of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, especially the right to a legal defence, the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, and the right to respect for privacy and protection of personal data; calls on the Member States and the Commission to evaluate in full transparency any national drafts or proposals for antiterrorist regulatory and legislative instruments in terms of their compliance with Article 2 TEU and the Charter;

27.

Recognises that the widespread nature of transnational cybercrime and cyberterrorism creates serious challenges and concerns about protection of fundamental rights in the online environment; considers it essential for the EU to develop state-of-the-art expertise in the field of cybersecurity so as to ensure closer compliance in cyberspace with Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter;

28.

Welcomes the report by the US Senate on the CIA detention and interrogation programmes; urges the Member States not to tolerate torture or any other inhuman and degrading forms of treatment on their territory; reiterates its calls on Member States to ensure accountability for violations of fundamental rights in the context of transportation and illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA; urges Member States to conduct open and transparent investigations to find out the truth about the use of their territory and airspace and to offer full cooperation to the European Parliament's enquiry on the matter, which has recently been reinstated, and its follow-up; calls for protection of those revealing such violations, such as journalists and whistleblowers;

29.

Expresses its concerns over repeated reports on the alleged violation of EU fundamental rights, and EU data protection legislation in particular, by the intelligence activities of Member States and of third countries that allow for the retention and accessing of electronic communications data of European citizens; strongly condemns the mass surveillance activities discovered to have been taking place since 2013 and deplores their continued existence; calls for clarification of these activities and in particular the current involvement of a number of Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take full account of the requirements and recommendations of Parliament as set out in its resolution of 12 March 2014 on the US NSA surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs; calls on the Member States to ensure that the activities of their intelligence services are consistent with fundamental rights and subject to parliamentary and judicial scrutiny;

30.

Expresses its concern about the adoption of national legislation by Member States allowing for blanket surveillance, and reiterates the need for security instruments that are targeted, strictly necessary and proportionate in a democratic society; reiterates its call to the EU and its Member States to adopt a whistleblower protection system;

31.

Is concerned that citizens are not fully aware of their right to data protection and privacy and of the channels of legal redress available to them; underlines in this respect the role of the national data protection authorities in upholding these rights and raising awareness of them; considers it essential to familiarise the public, in particular children, with the importance of personal data protection, including in cyberspace, and the dangers to which they are exposed; calls on the Member States to launch awareness-raising campaigns in schools; stresses that in light of rapid technology developments and increasing cyberattacks, special attention needs to be given to the protection of personal data on the internet, with a strong focus on the security of processing and storing; underlines that although the right to be forgotten is not absolute and will need to be balanced against other fundamental rights, individuals need to be given the right to have their online personal data rectified; expresses serious concern at the difficulty most internet users have in ensuring that their rights are respected in the digital sphere; calls on the Council to make rapid progress on the data protection package so as to ensure a high level of data protection across the EU;

32.

Recalls that Member States must ensure that their intelligence services operate in a lawful manner and in full compliance with the Treaties and the Charter; calls in this regard on Member States to ensure that national law will only allow for the collection and analysis of personal data (including so-called metadata) with the consent of the person concerned or following a court order granted on the basis of reasonable suspicion of the target being involved in criminal activity;

33.

Stresses that unlawful data collection and processing should be penalised in the same way as violation of the traditional confidentiality of correspondence; insists that the creation of ‘back doors’ or any other techniques to weaken or circumvent security measures or exploit their existing weaknesses should be strictly prohibited;

34.

Deplores the pressure placed on private companies by both public and private bodies to hand over internet users’ data, control internet content or jeopardise the principle of net neutrality;

35.

Emphasises that safeguarding fundamental rights in today's information society is a key issue for the EU, as the growing use of information and communications technologies (ICT) poses new threats to fundamental rights in cyberspace, the protection of which should be strengthened by ensuring that they are promoted and protected online in the same way and to the same extent as in the offline world;

36.

Urges the Commission to monitor intensively the implementation of existing EU legislation in this field and considers that Member States should apply the provisions of criminal law in practice through effective investigation and prosecution in order to ensure respect for the fundamental rights of victims;

37.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to show the utmost vigilance as regards the impact which certain new technologies, for example drones, might have on citizens’ fundamental rights and more especially the right to privacy and the protection of personal data;

38.

Underlines the crucial role of education in preventing radicalisation and the rise of intolerance and extremism among young people;

39.

Deplores the acts of discrimination, not to say brutality, perpetrated by police forces in some Member States against minority groups such as migrants, Roma, LGBTI people or people with disabilities; urges the Member States to investigate and punish such actions; believes that police forces should be made more aware of, and trained to deal with, the discrimination and violence inflicted on these minorities; calls on the Member States to restore the confidence that minorities should have in the police and to encourage them to report abuses; calls also on the authorities in the Member States to combat the discriminatory ethnic profiling carried out by some police forces;

40.

Refers to Article 10 of the Charter, which protects freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including freedom to practise the religion of one’s choice and to change religion or belief; considers that this also covers the freedom of non-believers; condemns any form of discrimination or intolerance and calls for a ban of any form of discrimination on these grounds; deplores, in this regard, recent instances of anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic discrimination and violence; calls on the Member States, including regional authorities to protect with all available tools freedom of religion or belief and to promote tolerance and intercultural dialogue through effective policy making, enhancing anti-discrimination policies where needed; recalls the importance of a neutral secular state in preventing discrimination against any religious, atheist or agnostic communities and guaranteeing equal treatment of all religions and beliefs; expresses its concerns over the application of blasphemy and religious insult laws in the European Union, which can have a serious impact on freedom of expression, and urges Member States to abolish them; strongly condemns attacks against places of worship and urges Member States not to allow such offences to go unpunished;

41.

Urges respect for freedom of religion or belief in the occupied part of Cyprus, where more than 500 religious and cultural monuments are on the way to collapse;

42.

Is alarmed at the rise in anti-Semitism in Europe and the increasingly widespread efforts to deny or downplay the Holocaust; is deeply concerned that many members of the Jewish community are planning to leave Europe because of the worsening climate of anti-Semitism and discrimination and violence against them;

43.

Expresses deep concern at the growth of anti-Islamic demonstrations, attacks on mosques and the widespread tendency to associate Islam with the religious fanaticism of a tiny minority; deplores discrimination and violence against the Muslim community; calls on the Member States to condemn such acts systematically and to apply zero tolerance in this connection;

44.

Strongly deplores the fact that the Council has still not adopted the 2008 proposal for a directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation; welcomes the prioritisation of this directive by the Commission; reiterates its call to the Council to adopt the proposal as soon as possible;

45.

Points out that pluralism, non-discrimination and tolerance are among the founding values of the Union, in accordance with Article 2 TEU; considers that only policies designed to promote both formal and substantive equality and to combat all forms of bias and discrimination can promote a cohesive society by breaking down all forms of prejudice which harm social integration; deplores the fact that even today in the EU there are still cases of discrimination, marginalisation and even violence and abuse based, in particular, on gender, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or personal beliefs, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientation;

46.

Considers that the Union and Member States should step up their efforts to combat discrimination and protect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity, and promote measures to enhance gender equality, the rights of the child, the rights of older persons, the rights of persons with disabilities, and the rights of LGBTI persons and persons belonging to national minorities; urges the EU and the Member States to include multiple discrimination within equality policies;

47.

Condemns all forms of violence and discrimination within EU territory and is concerned about the increase in them; calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt specific policy commitments to combat all forms of racism, including anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, Afrophobia and anti-Gypsyism;

48.

Calls on the Commission and the Council to acknowledge the need for reliable and comparable equality data to measure discrimination, disaggregated according to discrimination grounds, in order to inform policy-making, evaluate the implementation of EU anti-discrimination legislation and better enforce it; calls on the Commission to define consistent equality data collection standards, based on self-identification, EU data protection standards and consultation of the relevant communities; calls on the Member States to collect data on all grounds for discrimination;

49.

Urges the EU to adopt a directive condemning discrimination based on gender and seeking to counteract gender prejudices and clichés in education and the media;

50.

Calls for greater consistency on the part of the European Union in the field of minority protection; strongly believes that all Member States, as well as candidate countries, should be bound by the same principles and criteria in order to avoid the application of double standards; calls, therefore, for the establishment of an effective mechanism to monitor and ensure respect for the fundamental rights of minorities of all kinds both in candidate countries and in EU Member States;

51.

Emphasises that the European Union must be an area where respect for ethnic, cultural and linguistic diversity prevails; invites the EU institutions to elaborate a comprehensive EU protection system for national, ethnic and linguistic minorities in order to ensure their equal treatment, taking into account the relevant international legal standards and existing good practices, and calls on the Members States to ensure effective equality of these minorities, particularly on issues of language, education and culture; encourages the Member States that have not yet done so to ratify and effectively implement the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities; recalls also the need to implement the principles developed in the framework of the OSCE;

52.

Condemns all forms of discrimination on grounds of language use and calls on those Member States that have not yet done so to ratify and effectively implement the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages; urges the Member States and the Commission to take all necessary action to tackle any disproportionate administrative or legislative obstacles that could hinder linguistic diversity at European or national level;

53.

Stresses that the principles of human dignity, equality before the law and the prohibition of discrimination on any grounds are foundations of the rule of law; calls on the Member States to adopt a national legislative framework to address all forms of discrimination and guarantee effective implementation of the existing EU legal framework;

54.

Deplores the increasing tendency towards anti-Roma sentiment in the European Union and expresses its concern at the situation of the Roma in the EU and the numerous instances of persecution, violence, stigmatisation, discrimination and unlawful expulsions, which are contrary to fundamental rights and European Union law; urges the Commission to continue to take action against those Member States that allow institutionalised discrimination and segregation; calls on the Member States once more to effectively implement strategies to foster real inclusion, to pursue strengthened and pertinent action to promote integration, particularly in the fields of protection of fundamental rights, education, employment, housing and healthcare, and to combat violence, hate speech and discrimination against Roma, in line with the Council recommendation on effective Roma integration measures in Member States of 9 December 2013;

55.

Stresses the importance of properly implementing the national Roma integration strategies by developing integrated policies involving local authorities, non-governmental bodies and Roma communities in ongoing dialogue; calls on the Commission to provide for monitoring and better coordination of the implementation; calls on the Member States to cooperate with representatives of the Roma population in the management, monitoring and evaluation of projects affecting their communities, using available funds, including EU funds, while strictly monitoring respect for the fundamental rights of Roma people, including freedom of movement, pursuant to Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States;

56.

Deplores the existing discrimination against Roma people in national educational systems and on the labour market; stresses the increased vulnerability of Roma women and children in particular to multiple and simultaneous violations of their fundamental rights; reiterates the importance of protecting and promoting equal access to all rights for Roma children;

57.

Urges the Member States to adopt the necessary legislative changes with regard to sterilisation and to financially compensate the victims of coercive sterilisations performed on Roma women and women with mental disabilities, in line with the case-law of the ECtHR;

58.

Urges the EU and the Member States to combat and prosecute all forms of violence and discrimination against women; calls on the Member States in particular to deal effectively with the effects of domestic violence and sexual exploitation in all its forms, including that of refugees and migrant children, and early or forced marriage;

59.

Expresses concern about the extent and forms of violence against women in the EU, as documented by the FRA's EU-wide survey which showed that one in three women have experienced physical and/or sexual violence since the age of 15, and that an estimated 3,7 million women in the EU experience sexual violence over the period of one year; calls therefore on the Commission and the Member States to review existing legislation and to keep the issue of violence against women high on the agenda, as gender-based violence should not be tolerated; calls on the Commission to encourage national ratifications and start the procedure for EU accession to the Istanbul Convention as quickly as possible; notes that the immediate accession of all Member States to the Istanbul Convention would lead to the development of an integrated policy and to the promotion of international cooperation in the fight against all forms of violence against women, including sexual harassment both on and off line;

60.

Calls on the Member States to set up networks of centres providing support and shelter for women who are victims of trafficking and prostitution, ensuring that they receive psychological, medical, social and legal support and encouragement in finding stable employment and the accompanying entitlements;

61.

Expresses serious concern about continuing genital mutilation practices, which are a serious form of violence against women and girls and constitute an unacceptable violation of their right to physical integrity; urges the EU and the Member States to exercise extreme vigilance with regard to such practices within their borders, and to put a stop to them as swiftly as possible; calls in particular on the Member States to adopt a firm and dissuasive approach by training people working with migrants and systematically and effectively prosecuting and punishing the perpetrators of genital mutilation, for which there must be zero tolerance; insists this should be paralleled with information and awareness-raising campaigns targeting the groups concerned; welcomes the fact that EU legislation in the field of asylum views victims of genital mutilation as vulnerable persons and includes genital mutilation among the criteria for the granting of asylum;

62.

Calls on the Commission to ensure the continuity of data collection on the prevalence and nature of violence against women as a basis for robust policies to prevent violence and meet the needs of victims, including assessing the implementation of the EU Victims' Directive (2012/29/EU) and organising awareness-raising campaigns against sexual harassment; considers that data collection should build on the first EU-wide survey carried out by the FRA, and should be based on the cooperation between the Commission (including Eurostat), FRA and the European Institute for Gender Equality; reiterates the request to the Commission made in its resolution of 25 February 2014 with recommendations to the Commission on combating Violence Against Women to submit a proposal for an act establishing measures to promote and support the action of Member States in the field of prevention of violence against women and girls, including female genital mutilation; and calls on the Commission to establish 2016 as the year to combat violence against women and girls;

63.

Calls on the EU and the Member States to combat and prosecute all forms of violence against women; calls on the Commission to propose a legislative initiative to prohibit violence against women in the EU;

64.

Calls on the Commission to raise awareness of the need to foster a culture of respect and tolerance with a view to putting an end to all forms of discrimination against women; calls, moreover, on the Member States to ensure the implementation of national strategies concerning respect for and safeguarding of women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights; insists on the role of the Union in awareness-raising and promoting best practices on this issue, given that health is a fundamental human right essential to the exercise of other human rights;

65.

Is alarmed at the under-representation of women in decision-making processes, companies and their boards of directors, science and the political sphere, at both national and international level (large companies, national and European elections) and, in particular, at local level; calls for women to be supported in their professional development and efforts to obtain executive posts, and calls on the EU institutions to pay greater attention to the finding that a mere 17,8 % of board members of the largest publicly listed companies in the EU are women;

66.

Calls for the maternity leave directive to be unblocked in the Council, as this piece of legislation will make real and tangible gender equality possible, as well as bringing about harmonisation at EU level;

67.

Points out that more than half of all postgraduates are women and that this data is not reflected on the labour market, especially in senior decision-making positions; calls therefore on the Member States to take every step required to ensure equal participation of women and men in the labour market and to help women move into high-level posts, and especially to reach an agreement as soon as possible on the proposal for a directive on improving the gender balance among non-executive directors of companies listed on stock exchanges and related measures; deplores the fact that in the EU — when both do equal work — women’s income is still, on average, 16 % lower than men’s income; calls on the EU therefore to continue its work in ensuring equality between women and men in pay in line with Article 157 TFEU, in pensions and participation in the labour market, including in top management positions; considers that this action should help to combat poverty and to ensure that Europe is making full use of all available talent; deplores the fact that women’s unemployment rate is still significantly higher than that of men and stresses that financial independence of women must be a component of the fight against poverty;

68.

Calls on the Commission to step up monitoring of compliance with the principle of gender equality in European legislation; calls on the Member States to undertake a similar analysis of their national legislation;

69.

Recognises that sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are fundamental rights and an essential element of human dignity, gender equality and self-determination; urges the Commission to include SRHR, as basic human rights, in its next EU Health Strategy in order to ensure coherence between the EU's internal and external fundamental rights policy as called for by Parliament on 10 March 2015;

70.

Recognises that the denial of a life-saving abortion amounts to a serious breach of fundamental rights;

71.

Calls on the Member States, in liaison with the Commission, to recognise the right to access safe and modern contraceptives and sexuality education in schools; urges the Commission to complement national policies to improve public health, while keeping the European Parliament fully informed;

72.

Strongly condemns any form of violence against and ill-treatment of children; calls on the Member States, as States Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, to take appropriate measures to protect children from all forms of physical and psychological violence, including physical and sexual abuse, forced marriages, child labour and sexual exploitation;

73.

Strongly condemns the sexual exploitation of children, particularly the growing phenomenon of child pornography on the internet; urges the Union and Member States to unite in their efforts to combat these serious infringements of children’s rights and to take due account of the recommendations made by Parliament in its resolution of 11 March 2015 on child sexual abuse online (33); reiterates its call for those Member States which have not yet done so to transpose the directive on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography; calls, furthermore, on the Union and those Member States that have not yet done so to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse;

74.

Calls on the Member States to implement Directive 2011/93/EU on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and to strengthen the legal ability, technical capabilities and financial resources of law enforcement authorities in order to increase cooperation, including with Europol, with a view to investigating and dismantling child sex offender networks more efficiently, while prioritising the rights and safety of the children involved;

75.

Stresses the role of professionals who work with children, such as teachers, youth workers and paediatricians, when it comes to detecting signs of physical and psychological violence against children, including cyber bullying; calls on the Member States to ensure that such professionals have their awareness raised, and receive training, to this end; calls, furthermore, on the Member States to establish hotlines where children can report any act of mistreatment, sexual violence, intimidation or harassment against them;

76.

Considers that children's personal data online must be duly protected and that children need to be informed in a child-friendly manner about the risks and consequences of using their personal data online; calls on the Member States to launch awareness-raising campaigns in schools; stresses that online profiling of children should be prohibited;

77.

Condemns any form of discrimination against children and calls on the Commission and Member States to take united action to eradicate discrimination against children; in particular, calls on the Member States and the Commission to explicitly consider children as a priority when programming and implementing regional and cohesion policies;

78.

Calls on the Member States to ensure effective access to justice for all children, whether as suspects, perpetrators, victims or parties to proceedings; affirms the importance of strengthening the procedural safeguards for children in criminal proceedings, particularly in the context of the ongoing discussions on a directive on special safeguards for children suspected and accused in criminal proceedings;

79.

Expresses its concern about the increase in the number of cases of international abduction by parents; stresses, in this context, the importance of the role of the European Parliament Mediator for International Parental Child Abduction; underlines the importance of a common EU approach to finding missing children in the EU; calls on the Member States to increase police and judicial cooperation in cross-border cases involving missing children and to develop hotlines to search for missing children;

80.

Recalls that the child’s best interests as referred to in Article 24 of the Charter must always be a prime consideration in any policy and measure adopted in relation to children; recalls that the right to education is provided for in the Charter and that education is essential, not only for a child’s welfare and personal development but also for the future of society; considers the education of children from low-income families to be an essential precondition for enabling children to escape from poverty; calls on the Member States, therefore, to promote high-quality education for all;

81.

Stresses that the interests and rights of children of EU citizens should be properly protected, not just within the Union but also beyond its borders, and calls consequently for enhanced cooperation with the institutions responsible for children's well-being in non-EU Nordic countries; considers that all the EU's partners (including members of the EEA) should ratify the 1996 Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children;

82.

Recognises that the financial and economic crisis has had a serious negative impact on the realisation of children's rights and wellbeing; calls on the Member States to step up their efforts in tackling child poverty and social exclusion through effective implementation of the Commission Recommendation ‘Investing in children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage’ through integrated strategies supporting access to adequate resources, enabling access to affordable, quality services and promoting children's participation in decision-making that affects them; calls on the Commission to take further measures for monitoring the implementation of the recommendation;

83.

Invites the Commission to propose an ambitious and comprehensive successor to the EU Agenda on the Rights of the Child in 2015; calls on the Commission to ensure effective mainstreaming of children’s rights across all the EU’s legislation, policies and financial decisions; calls on the Commission to report annually on the progress made on respect for the rights of children and the full implementation of the EU acquis on children’s rights; calls on the Commission to ensure that the mandate and resources of the children’s rights coordinator adequately reflect the EU’s commitment to systematically and effectively mainstreaming children’s rights; calls on the Commission to adopt the EU guidance on integrated child protection systems that has been announced;

84.

Welcomes the trend towards defining forced marriage as a criminal offence in the Member States; calls on the Member States to be vigilant and to provide training for and raise the awareness of staff who come into contact with children, such as teachers and youth workers, so as to equip them to identify children who are at risk of being abducted to their country of origin in order to be forcibly married;

85.

Condemns in the strongest terms all forms of discrimination and violence on EU territory against lesbian, gay, transgender, bisexual and intersex people (LGBTI), as fostered by laws and policies that restrict the fundamental rights of LGBTI people; calls on the Commission and Member States to adopt laws and policies to combat homophobia and transphobia; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to put forward an action plan or strategy at EU level for equality on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, as repeatedly called for by Parliament and as promised by Commissioner Jourová in the process of the Commission hearings; in this regard, recalls its resolution of 4 February 2014 on the EU Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity; emphasises, nevertheless, that this comprehensive policy must respect the competences of the European Union, of its agencies and of its Member States;

86.

Considers that LGBTI people's fundamental rights are more likely to be safeguarded if they have access to legal institutions such as cohabitation, registered partnership or marriage; welcomes the fact that 19 Member States currently offer these options, and calls on other Member States to consider doing so; reiterates, moreover, its call on the Commission to submit a proposal for an ambitious regulation to ensure mutual recognition of civil status documents (including legal gender recognition, marriages and registered partnerships) and their legal effects, in order to reduce discriminatory legal and administrative barriers for citizens who exercise their right to free movement;

87.

Calls on the Member States to be vigilant and firm and to impose penalties on public office holders who insult or stigmatise LGBTI people in a public forum;

88.

Encourages the EU Member States to support trade unions and employers' organisations in their efforts to adopt diversity and non-discrimination policies with a focus on LGBTI people;

89.

Considers that the authorities of the Member States should facilitate procedures enabling people who have changed sex to have their new gender recognised in official documents; reiterates its condemnation of any legal recognition procedure which imposes sterilisation on transgender people;

90.

Deplores the fact that transgender people are still considered mentally ill in the majority of Member States and calls on them to review national mental health catalogues, while ensuring that medically necessary treatment remains available for all trans people;

91.

Welcomes the initiative shown by the Commission in pushing for depathologisation of transgender identities in the review of the World Health Organisation's International Classification of Diseases (ICD); calls on the Commission to intensify efforts to prevent gender variance in childhood from becoming a new ICD diagnosis;

92.

Strongly regrets that genital ‘normalisation’ surgery of intersex infants is widespread, despite not being medically necessary; welcomes, in this regard, the Maltese Gender Identity, Gender Expression and Sex Characteristics Act of April 2015, which bans such surgery on intersex infants and reinforces the principle of self-determination for intersex people, and calls on other states to follow the Maltese example;

93.

Deplores the discrimination and exclusion that persons with a disability still face today; calls on the Commission, the Member States and regional and local authorities to implement the European Disability Strategy and to monitor and apply the relevant European legislation; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to relaunch the legislative initiative on an Accessibility Act, in the form of a cross-cutting instrument that can increase the protection afforded to persons with disabilities and ensure consistency between all EU policies in this respect; also calls on the Commission to maximise synergies between the EU disability strategy and the provisions of the CEDAW and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in order to ensure that recognised rights are substantively enjoyed and effectively exercised, including by harmonising and implementing the legislative framework and through cultural and political action;

94.

Urges the Commission to guide Member States in making the best use of European funds in accordance with the EU's obligations under the UNCRPD Convention and to support and work closely with NGOs and organisations to ensure the proper implementation of the Convention; calls on the EU and Member States to improve access to employment and training for people with disabilities, including people with psycho-social disabilities and to support independent living conditions and de-institutionalisation programmes in line with Article 26 of the Charter;

95.

Stresses the need to respect the right of people with disabilities to political participation in elections; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to include an assessment of compatibility with the UNCRPD in its reporting on the implementation of Council Directives 93/109/EC and 94/80/EC, which set out the right to vote and stand as a candidate in elections to the European Parliament and municipal elections; regrets the fact that a large number of people with disabilities in the EU who have been deprived of their legal capacity are also deprived of the right to vote; calls therefore on the Member States to amend their national legislation in order not to systematically withdraw the right to vote from people with disabilities who have been deprived of their legal capacity but rather to perform case-by case analyses and to provide assistance to people with disabilities during voting procedures;

96.

Calls on the Commission to assess the compatibility of European legislation with the requirements of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and to evaluate any future proposal in the light of that convention by means of its impact assessments;

97.

Condemns the use of forms of physical and pharmacological coercion for mental disabilities and calls on the EU and the Member States to adopt social integration policies;

98.

Deplores the fact that people with disabilities still encounter obstacles to their access to the market in goods and services within the Union; considers that these obstacles are of a nature to limit their participation in society and constitute a breach of the rights which they derive, in particular, from their European citizenship; calls on the Commission to make rapid progress with the work on accessibility in the European Union so that a legislative act can be adopted without delay;

99.

Call on the EU institutions and Member States to closely engage people with disabilities, including through their representative organisations, in decision-making processes in their respective fields of competence, in line with Article 4(3) of the CRPD;

100.

Call on the EU Member States and institutions to ensure that opportunities to participate in consultation processes are clearly and widely publicised using accessible communications, that input can be provided in other formats such as braille or Easy Read, and that public hearings and meetings discussing proposed laws and policies should be made accessible;

101.

Call on the Commission to harmonise data collection on disability through EU social surveys in line with the requirements of Article 31 of the CRPD; emphasises that such data collection should use methodologies that are inclusive of all people with disabilities, including those with more severe impairments and those living in institutions;

102.

Deplores the fact that many older people face discrimination and violations of their fundamental rights every day, in particular in access to adequate income, employment and healthcare and to necessary goods and services; recalls that Article 25 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights proclaims the rights of the elderly to lead a life of dignity and independence and to participate in social and cultural life; calls on the Commission to develop a Strategy on Demographic Change to put into effect Article 25 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

103.

Expresses concern that maltreatment, neglect and abuse of older people is widespread in the Member States; calls on the Member States to adopt measures to combat abuse and all forms of violence against the elderly and to promote their independence by supporting renovation and accessibility of housing; recalls that elderly women more often live under the poverty line because of the gender pay gap and later the pension gap;

104.

Calls on the Member States to ensure the inclusion of younger workers, particularly those affected by the economic crisis, on the labour market, including through the organisation and provision of training for the social advancement of young people;

105.

Calls for people’s dignity to be respected at the end of life, in particular by ensuring that decisions expressed in living wills are recognised and respected;

106.

Expresses concern that Member States’ cuts in public spending and pensions is contributing greatly to poverty in old age by decreasing older people’s disposable income, worsening their living conditions, creating inequalities in affordability of services and creating a growing number of older people with incomes just above the poverty threshold;

107.

Deplores incidents of hate speech and hate crime motivated by racism, xenophobia or religious intolerance or by bias against a person's disability, sexual orientation or gender identity, which occur in the EU on a daily basis; calls on the Member States to protect fundamental rights and to promote understanding, acceptance and tolerance between the different communities in their territory; calls on the EU to make the fight against hate crimes a priority when drawing up European policies against discrimination and in the field of justice; calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen the fight against hate crime and discriminatory attitudes and behaviours by developing a comprehensive strategy for fighting hate crime, bias violence and discrimination;

108.

Is concerned at the growing presence of hate speech on the internet and calls on the Member States to put in place a simple procedure enabling members of the public to report the presence of hate content on the internet;

109.

Expresses its concerns regarding investigations and convictions in connection with hate crimes in the Member States; calls on the Member States to take all appropriate measures to encourage the reporting of such crimes, including by ensuring adequate protection, as FRA findings from its large-scale surveys have consistently shown that victims of crime are reluctant to come forward and report to the police;

110.

Expresses its concern that several Member States have not transposed correctly the provisions of Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA and calls on the Member States to fully transpose and implement EU standards and to ensure the enforcement of national legislation punishing all forms of hate crime, incitement to hatred and harassment, and systematically triggering the prosecution of those criminal offences; calls on the Commission to monitor the correct transposition of the Framework Decision and to launch infringement procedures against those Member States that fail to transpose it; calls, furthermore for a review of the framework decision in order for it to fully cover all forms of hate crime and crimes committed with a bias or discriminatory motive, and to clearly define consistent investigation and prosecution standards;

111.

Calls on the Commission to support training programmes for law enforcement and judicial authorities, and for the relevant EU agencies, in preventing and tackling discriminatory practices and hate crime; calls on the Member States to provide the authorities responsible for investigation and prosecution with practical tools and skills to enable them to identify and deal with the offences covered by the Framework Decision, and to interact and communicate with victims;

112.

Observes with concern the rise of political parties that base their political programmes on exclusion on ethnic, sexual orientation or religious grounds;

113.

Is deeply concerned at the growing trivialisation of racist and xenophobic acts and speech owing to the ever greater visibility in the public sphere of racist and xenophobic groups, some of which have acquired or are seeking the status of political parties;

114.

Expresses its deep concern about the rise of political parties that are using the current economic and social crisis to justify their racist, xenophobic and anti-Islamic message;

115.

Forcefully condemns the intimidation and persecution of minorities, particularly Roma and migrants, by paramilitary groups, some of which are directly linked to a political party; urges the Member States to outlaw and punish such practices;

116.

Expresses its concern at the number of people who have lost their homes as a result of the economic crisis; takes the view that homeless people must be kept integrated within society, and that their isolation and marginalisation need to be combated; to that end, calls on the Member States to adopt ambitious policies to help such people; stresses that homeless people are vulnerable people and reiterates its call on the Member States to refrain from stigmatising them as criminals; calls on the Member States to abolish any law or policy which presents them as such; calls on the Member States to devise national strategies seeking to combat the phenomenon of homelessness on their territories; Calls on the Commission to support the Member States in their missions to combat homelessness by facilitating the exchange of best practice and accurate data collection; calls on the Commission to monitor human rights violations in the Member States that arise as a result of homelessness; stresses that the right to housing assistance for the poorest in society is enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights;

117.

Condemns the fact that many asylum-seekers and migrants seeking to reach the European Union are continuing to die in the Mediterranean, and the role played by smugglers and traffickers, who deny migrants their fundamental rights; points out that the EU and the Member States should take energetic and compulsory measures to prevent further tragedies at sea; calls on the EU and its Member States to put solidarity and respect for the fundamental rights of migrants and asylum seekers at the core of EU migration policies, and in particular:

118.

Calls on the Union and Member States to adopt the necessary legislation to put into practice the principle of solidarity as referred to in Article 80 TFEU;

119.

Roundly condemns the security protection at the EU’s borders, which now sometimes even takes the form of walls and barbed wire, and the lack of legal routes for entering the European Union, which results in many asylum seekers and migrants being forced to resort to increasingly dangerous methods, placing them at the mercy of people-smugglers and traffickers;

120.

Calls for fundamental-rights-sensitive border controls, and stresses the need for democratic oversight by Parliament of Frontex operations;

121.

Calls for the suspension of all activities identified as being in violation of fundamental rights under EU law or the Frontex mandate;

122.

Stresses the negative impact which the Dublin Regulation has on effective access to international protection in the absence of a genuine common European asylum system, particularly in light of ECJ and ECHR case law; condemns the fact that the revision of the regulation did not lead to its suspension, or at least to the abolition of return to the first country of entry into the EU, and the absence of action by the Commission and the Member States on a possible alternative based on solidarity among Member States;

123.

Calls on the Member States to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families;

124.

Condemns the indiscriminate recourse to unlawful detention of irregular migrants, including asylum seekers, unaccompanied minors and stateless persons; calls on Member States to comply with the provisions of the ‘Return Directive’, including respect for the right to dignity and for the principle of a child’s best interest, and with international and EU law; recalls that the detention of migrants must remain a measure of last resort and urges the Member States to implement alternative measures; condemns the appalling detention conditions in some Member States and urges the Commission to address them without delay; reiterates the need to ensure that irregular migrants are granted the right to an effective remedy in the event of violations of their rights;

125.

Calls on the Member States and the Commission to take the necessary measures to provide information and ensure transparency concerning the detention of migrants and asylum seekers in numerous Member States, and urges the Commission to propose a revision of Regulation (EC) No 862/2007 so that it will include statistical data on the operation of detention systems and facilities;

126.

Stresses the importance of democratic control of all forms of deprivation of liberty pursuant to the laws on immigration and asylum; calls on Members of the European Parliament and of national parliaments to pay regular visits to reception and detention centres for migrants and asylum seekers, and calls on the Member States and the Commission to facilitate access to these centres for NGOs and reporters;

127.

Calls for closer monitoring of migrant reception and detention centres, of the treatment of migrants and of asylum formalities in the Member States; expresses concern at ‘hot return’ procedures and at the violent incidents occurring in various ‘hotspots’ in southern Europe, necessitating the immediate launch by the Commission within this framework of political dialogue with countries engaging in such practices with a view to upholding the rule of law;

128.

Calls on the European Union and its Member States to establish concrete measures and best practices aimed at promoting equality of treatment and social inclusion so as to improve the integration of migrants into society; recalls in this regard that it is essential to fight against negative stereotypes and misinformation about migrants by developing counter-narratives, primarily at school and directed towards young people, to enhance the positive impact of migration;

129.

Considers that migrant children are particularly vulnerable, especially when they are unaccompanied; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement Parliament’s resolution of 12 September 2013 on the situation of unaccompanied minors in the EU; calls on the Member States to fully implement the CEAS package in order to improve the condition of unaccompanied minors in the EU; welcomes the Court of Justice judgment in Case C-648/11, which stated that the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application made in more than one Member State by an unaccompanied minor is the state in which the minor is present after having lodged an application there; recalls that unaccompanied minors are above all children and that child protection, rather than immigration policies, must be the leading principle for Member States and the EU when dealing with them;

130.

Calls for an evaluation of how funds earmarked and used for home affairs are spent, in particular funds granted for the reception of asylum seekers; calls on the EU to take action should it emerge that funds have been used for activities that do not comply with fundamental rights;

131.

Calls for assistance to be provided to those Member States situated at the external borders of the Union to help them address systematic weaknesses in reception conditions and asylum procedures, which are aggravated by the increase in the number of asylum seekers;

132.

Calls on the EU to hold its own agents liable for any infringements of fundamental rights they might commit; in particular, calls for assurances to be given that an investigation will be opened, following allegations that infringements were committed during operations coordinated by the Frontex agency, and that appropriate measures, of a disciplinary or other nature, will be taken against those who are shown to have committed such infringements; to that end calls for an internal Frontex redress mechanism as requested by the European Ombudsman in his investigation into Case OI/5/2012/BEH-MHZ and for the conclusions of investigations into allegations of human rights infringements to be made public; calls, moreover, for Frontex operations to be halted where infringements of human rights have been committed during such operations, as provided for in Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1168/2011;

133.

Calls on the Member States to ratify without further delay the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings;

134.

Calls on the Member States to ensure that women victims of gender-based persecution have genuine access to international protection; calls on the Member States to follow the Commission guidelines for the implementation of Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification, including the immediate issue of a residence permit valid in its own right to family members who have entered for reasons of family reunification when there are particularly difficult circumstances, such as domestic violence;

135.

Welcomes the fact that EU legislation on asylum treats victims of genital mutilation as vulnerable persons and includes genital mutilation among the criteria to be taken into account when asylum is sought; calls on the Member States to train people working with migrants to screen for women and girls likely to be subjected to genital mutilation in their home country;

136.

Stresses that the right to freedom of movement and residence of European citizens and their families laid down in the Treaties and guaranteed by Directive 2004/38/EC on freedom of movement is one of the most concrete fundamental rights of European citizens; condemns any attempt to review this acquis, in particular the reintroduction of Schengen border controls outside the Schengen border code, and calls for any breach of the rules to result in action before the Court of Justice; expresses its concerns about the growing trend of quick expulsions of EU citizens from their Member States of residence as a result of the loss of their jobs and income in breach of the existing framework; considers that this is contrary to the spirit of freedom of movement;

137.

Deplores the way in which the financial, economic and sovereign debt crisis, together with the budgetary restrictions imposed, has negatively affected economic, civil, social and cultural rights, often resulting in increasing unemployment, poverty, and precarious working and living conditions, as well as exclusion and isolation, particularly in the Member States in which economic adjustment programmes have been adopted, and underlines that a recent Eurostat note points out that one European in four is now at risk of poverty and exclusion;

138.

Notes that the economic crisis and measures implemented to address it have affected the right to access to basic necessities such as education, housing, healthcare and social security, as well as having a negative impact on the overall health condition of the population in some Member States; stresses the need to respect the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion as stated in Article 30 of the European Social Charter; calls on all Member States to introduce support measures, in accordance with national practices, to provide their citizens with decent living conditions and to combat social exclusion;

139.

Stresses that the EU institutions, as well as Member States which implement structural reforms in their social and economic systems, are always under an obligation to observe the Charter and their international obligations, and are therefore accountable for the decisions taken; reiterates its call to align economic adjustment programmes with the EU objectives set out in Article 151 TFEU, including the promotion of employment and improvement of living and working conditions; reiterates the need to ensure that there is full democratic oversight through the effective involvement of parliaments over the measures taken by the EU institutions and Member States in reaction to the crisis;

140.

Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to look into the impact on fundamental rights of austerity measures, proposed or implemented, in a gender-sensitive manner, taking into account the disproportionate impact of austerity measures on women; calls on the EU institutions to take remedial action immediately where austerity measures have had a negative impact on women’s economic, social and cultural rights;

141.

Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to look into the impact on fundamental rights and freedoms, including social and labour rights, of the measures proposed or implemented to deal with the crisis and to take remedial action if necessary should it emerge that the protection of rights is regressing or that international law, including ILO conventions and recommendations, is being infringed;

142.

Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States, when adopting and implementing corrective measures and budget cuts, to conduct an impact assessment on fundamental rights and to guarantee that sufficient resources are still made available to safeguard respect for fundamental rights and to ensure minimum essential levels of civil economic, cultural and social rights, with special attention to the most vulnerable and socially disadvantaged groups;

143.

Calls on the EU institutions and the Member States to recognise that long-term investment in social inclusion is beneficial, as it tackles the high cost of discrimination and inequality; calls on the Member States for appropriate public investment to sustain education and healthcare and ensure that access to justice and redress in cases of discrimination are not put in danger by drastic funding cuts in equality bodies’ budgets; calls on EU and national institutions not to undermine social inclusion by budgetary measures affecting the functioning of community-based organisations working for equality;

144.

Calls on the Commission to consider proposing accession to the European Social Charter, in order effectively to safeguard the social rights of European citizens; calls on the Member States to promote the extension of the social rights in the EU Charter to other social rights mentioned in the revised Social Charter of the Council of Europe such as the right to work, the right to fair remuneration, and the right to be protected from poverty and social exclusion;

145.

Reiterates that corruption crime, in particular organised crime, represents a serious fundamental rights violation and a threat to democracy and the rule of law; stresses that corruption by diverting public funds from the public use for which they are intended reduces the level and quality of public services, thereby seriously harming the fair treatment of all citizens; urges the Member States and European institutions to devise effective instruments for preventing, combating and sanctioning corruption and crime and to continue regularly to monitor the use made of public funds, be they European or national; to that end, calls on the Member States and the institutions to facilitate the rapid establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office, thus providing appropriate guarantees of independence and efficiency;

146.

Stresses that corruption represents a serious fundamental rights violation; calls on the Member States and institutions to devise effective instruments for combating corruption and to regularly monitor the use of public funds, be they European or national; underlines that increased transparency and access to public documents by citizens and journalists is an efficient way to expose and combat corruption;

147.

Urges the European Commission to adopt an anti-corruption strategy that is complemented by effective instruments; calls on all Member States and the EU to join the Open Government Partnership and to devise concrete strategies to promote transparency, empower citizens and fight corruption; calls on the Member States to follow up on the recommendations of the European Commission’s Anti-Corruption Report and on Parliament’s resolution of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering: recommendations on action and initiatives to be taken (34), and to strengthen police and judicial cooperation in fighting corruption;

148.

Urges the Member States to step up their fight against all kinds of serious organised crime, including trafficking in human beings, sexual abuse and exploitation, torture and forced labour, in particular involving women and children;

149.

Calls on the Commission to provide for offences to thwart environmental crimes committed by individuals or organised criminal groups which have an impact on the rights of human beings — the right to health, life and the enjoyment of a healthy environment –, as well as on the economy and on the use of public resources; urges the Commission to examine the effective implementation in the EU of the right of access to justice in the context of the right of every person of present and future generations to live in an environment conducive to his or her health and wellbeing;

150.

Proposes the launching of a European anti-corruption code and a transparent system of indicators regarding corruption levels in the Member States and progress made in eradicating corruption, as well as an annual comparative report on the extent to which this major problem has taken hold at European level;

151.

Calls on the Commission and Member States to put an end to tax competition and effectively combat harmful tax practices, and tax evasion and avoidance in the EU, which harm Member States’ capacity to harness to a maximum their available resources in order fully to realise economic, social and cultural rights;

152.

Condemns the growing phenomenon of human trafficking, especially for sexual exploitation, and calls on the EU and its Member States to take measures, in accordance with the EU directive, to combat the demand for exploitation that is fuelling trafficking in all its forms;

153.

Points out that the fundamental rights of prisoners must be guaranteed by the national authorities; deplores the conditions in the prisons and other custodial institutions of numerous Member States including prison overcrowding and ill-treatment of prisoners; regards it as essential that the EU adopt an instrument which guarantees that the recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment (CPT) and the judgments of the ECtHR are implemented;

154.

Recalls that the abuse of custodial measures results in prison overcrowding across Europe which violates the fundamental rights of individuals and compromises the mutual trust necessary to underpin judicial cooperation in Europe; reaffirms the need for Member States to honour the commitments made in international and European fora to making more frequent use of probation measures and sanctions which offer an alternative to imprisonment, and to making social reintegration the ultimate aim of a period of custody; calls on the Member States, therefore, to adopt strategies to promote the training and employment of persons serving terms of imprisonment;

155.

Reiterates the recommendations to the Commission made in its resolution of 27 February 2014 on the review of the European Arrest Warrant (35), notably as regards the introduction of a proportionality test and a fundamental rights exception in the European Arrest Warrant or mutual recognition measures more generally;

156.

Regrets that the three framework decisions covering the transfer of prisoners, probation and alternative sanctions and the European Supervision Order, which have great potential for reducing prison overcrowding, have only been implemented by some Member States;

157.

Calls on the Commission to assess the impact of detention policies and criminal justice systems on children; points out that across the EU children’s rights are directly affected in the case of children living in detention facilities with their parents; underlines the fact that an estimated 800 000 children in the EU are separated from an imprisoned parent each year, which impacts on the rights of children in multiple ways;

158.

Points out that developing a European area of justice based on mutual recognition and legal safeguards, thus harmonising the different justice systems of the Member States, especially in criminal matters, should remain among the high priorities of the European institutions for the EU Justice Agenda 2020; considers that the effective application of the Charter and the secondary EU legislation on fundamental rights is crucial to the trust of citizens in the proper functioning of the European area of justice;

159.

Points out that the right of access to justice and to an independent and impartial tribunal is vital for the protection of fundamental rights, which are effective only if they are judiciable, for democracy and the rule of law; reiterates the importance of ensuring that both the civil and the criminal justice systems are efficient and that the independence of the judiciary is guaranteed;

160.

Welcomes the European e-Justice portal, which is operated by the Commission and provides professionals and the public with information on justice systems and is a practical tool to improve access to justice, with a separate section on fundamental rights which aims at informing citizens where to turn in cases of violations of their fundamental rights;

161.

Welcomes the steps already taken at European level to harmonise Member States’ safeguards in criminal proceedings and their benefits for citizens; reiterates the importance of adopting EU legislation on procedural rights which complies with the highest standard of protection enshrined in the Charter, international human rights treaties and the constitutional law of the Member States;

162.

Deplores the lack of access to legal aid in many Member States and the fact that this affects the right of access to justice of those who lack sufficient resources; regards it as essential that the EU adopt a strong and comprehensive directive on legal aid;

163.

Calls on the EU and the Member States to provide for measures to support and protect whistleblowers who denounce illegal actions;

164.

Considers that active and participatory EU citizenship should be encouraged through access to documents and information, transparency, good governance and administration, and democratic participation and representation, with decision-making as close as possible to Union citizens; points to the need to enable civil society to participate fully in decision-making at European level, this being guaranteed by Article 11 of the Treaty on European Union, and stresses the importance of the principles of transparency and dialogue; notes that the right of citizens to access documents held by public institutions empowers citizens and allows them to scrutinise and evaluate public authorities and hold them to account; deplores in this context the deadlock in the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and renews its call on the Commission and Council to resume work, taking Parliament’s proposals into consideration;

165.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that information campaigns are conducted on European citizenship and the rights connected with it: the rights to diplomatic and consular protection, the right of petition, the right to submit complaints to the European Ombudsman, the right to vote and stand in European elections and the right to submit citizens’ initiatives;

166.

Applauds the European Ombudsman for her determination to ensure good administration and transparency in EU institutions and bodies;

167.

Condemns the fact that more than 15 million nationals of non-EU countries and 500 000 stateless persons are being discriminated against on account of the refusal to recognise their citizenship; calls on the EU and its Member States to respect the fundamental right to citizenship and in particular calls on the Member States to ratify, and give full effect to, the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness and the 1997 European Convention on Nationality;

168.

Points out that informing citizens about their fundamental rights is an integral part of the right to good governance as set out in the Charter; calls on the Member States to pay particular attention to the most needy, to ensure that their rights are explained to them, to support them and to ensure that those rights are respected;

169.

Requests the Commission to take a step forward in consolidating the right to good administration by turning the Code of Good Administrative Behaviour of the EU into a legally binding regulation;

170.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure through their policies that fundamental rights are properly respected, guaranteed, protected and developed further within the EU; calls on the Member States to renew their efforts to recognise the right of petition and the right of recourse to the Ombudsman as a means for citizens to uphold their rights;

171.

Expresses its concern, on the basis of hundreds of petitions received yearly, at the shortcomings in the actual implementation, both in letter and spirit, in Member States of the provisions of EU environmental legislation, such as the Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment directives; asks the Commission to undertake closer oversight of the substance of such procedures, particularly when specific cases are the subject of petitions;

172.

Reiterates the importance of the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI), as a new citizens’ right introduced by the Lisbon Treaty which aims at increasing participatory democracy in the EU; notes the importance of the ECI as a powerful tool providing European citizens with a direct democratic right to contribute to the decision-making process of the EU, in addition to European citizens’ right to submit petitions to the European Parliament (EP) and their right of appeal to the European Ombudsman;

173.

Calls on the Commission to strengthen the role of the European Citizens’ Initiatives (ECIs) by adopting a citizen-friendly approach to tackling all the deficiencies of this instrument in the upcoming revision of Regulation (EU) No 211/2011 whilst at the same time improving information campaigns to citizens on the use of the ECI and its power to influence the EU policy-making process;

174.

Considers the protection of victims of crime a priority; calls on the Member States to properly implement, without delay, the EU Victims’ Directive (2012/29/EU), so as to meet the transposition deadline of 16 November 2015, and on the Commission and the Member States to ensure, in compliance with its Article 28, collection of comparable data on its transposition, in particular on how victims, including victims of crimes committed with a discriminatory motive, have accessed their rights; considers that much remains to be done to support victims of crime, informing them of their rights and ensuring effective referral systems and training for police officers and legal practitioners to establish a relationship of trust and confidence with victims, as shown by FRA research on victim support; welcomes the adoption, in 2013, of a regulation on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters;

175.

Calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to ensure the highest quality of comparable data collection on the transposition of the EU Victims’ Directive (2012/29/EU) and on how victims, including victims of crimes committed with a bias and discriminatory motive, have accessed their rights as required under Article 28 of the Directive;

176.

Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take account of demographic developments and changes in the size and composition of households when designing their policies; urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that their social and employment policies do not discriminate on the basis of the size and composition of households;

177.

Points to the legal vacuum as regards citizens’ access to legal redress when Member States have not, or have only belatedly, transposed EU legislation that concerns them directly; stresses the need for coordination of actions at all levels to protect and promote fundamental rights encompassing EU institutions, Member States, regional and local authorities, NGOs and civil society;

178.

Stresses the need to strengthen institutional transparency, democratic accountability and openness in the EU and urges the competent EU institutions and all Member States to:

179.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

22.9.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/37

—

having regard to Article 17(7) of the Treaty on European Union,

—

having regard to Article 246 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

—

having regard to its resolution of 1 December 2005 on guidelines for the approval of the Commission (1),

—

having regard to its decision of 20 October 2010 on the revision of the framework agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission (2),

—

having regard to its decision of 14 September 2011 on amendment of Rules 106 and 192 of, and Annex XVII to, Parliament’s Rules of Procedure (3),

—

having regard to the code of conduct for European Commissioners, particularly Articles 1.3 to 1.6 thereof,

—

having regard to Rules 52 and 118 of, and Annex XVI to, its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0197/2015),

A.

hearings of Commissioners-designate, first used in 1994, are now a well-established practice which increases the democratic legitimacy of the European Union institutions and brings those institutions closer to European citizens;

B.

the hearings are indispensable in enabling Parliament to make an informed judgement on the Commission when it holds its vote of confidence allowing the Commission to take office;

C.

the hearing process gives Parliament and EU citizens the opportunity to discover and evaluate the candidates’ personalities, qualifications, preparedness and priorities as well as their knowledge of their designated portfolio;

D.

the hearing process increases transparency and enhances the democratic legitimacy of the Commission as a whole;

E.

equality between women and men must be ensured in all areas, including employment; whereas this requirement must be reflected in the composition of the European Commission; whereas despite repeated requests from Jean-Claude Juncker in 2014 the governments proposed a far greater number of male rather than female candidates; whereas the women who were proposed primarily come from Member States with smaller populations and the larger Member States largely ignored this requirement; whereas the only fair solution is to ask each Member State to propose two candidates, one male and one female, so that the President-designate is able to propose a high quality College with an equal number of men and women;

F.

the hearing process, while having demonstrated its effectiveness, can always be improved, in particular by means of more flexible and dynamic exchanges between the Commissioner and members of the committee responsible for the hearing;

G.

the hearing of Commissioner-designate for Vice-President, Frans Timmermans, highlighted the need to adapt Parliament’s procedures in the event that future Commissions have a special status for one or more Vice-Presidents;

H.

Article 3(3) of the TEU states that the Union ‘shall promote […] equality between women and men’ and Article 23 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states that ‘equality between women and men must be ensured in all areas, including employment, work and pay’;

1.

Considers that public hearings of Commissioners-designate present an important opportunity for the European Parliament and EU citizens to assess the priorities of each candidate and their professional suitability for the role;

2.

Considers that it would be useful to set a deadline by which all Member States have to put forward their candidates, so as to leave adequate time for the Commission President-elect to allocate the portfolios taking into account the work experience and background of the candidate, and for Parliament to conduct its hearings and evaluations, and asks its President to enter into discussion with the other institutions with a view to achieving this objective;

3.

Considers also that each Member State should henceforth put forward at least two candidates — male and female on a footing of equality — for consideration by the Commission President-elect; considers it important that the Union should also attain within its own institutions the gender equality objectives which it has set;

4.

Considers that checks on declarations of the financial interests of Commissioners designated by the Committee on Legal Affairs should be improved; considers that, to this end, declarations of financial interests should include family interests as provided for by Article 1.6 of the code of conduct for Commissioners; considers that confirmation by the Committee on Legal Affairs of the absence of any conflict of interests, based on a substantive analysis of the declarations of financial interests, constitutes an essential precondition for the holding of the hearing by the committee responsible;

5.

Recalls that it is the committees which are responsible for conducting the hearings; considers, however, that when a vice-president of the Commission has responsibilities which are primarily horizontal, the hearing could exceptionally be carried out in a different format such as a meeting of the Conference of Presidents or a meeting of the Conference of Committee Chairs, provided that such a meeting enables dialogues and includes the respective committees responsible in order to allow them to hear its Commissioner-designate;

6.

Considers that the written questionnaire sent ahead of each hearing should allow for 7 questions instead of 5, but that there should not be several sub-questions under each question;

7.

Considers that it would be better to have around 25 questions, but with each questioner allowed immediate follow-up, so as to enhance the effectiveness and inquisitorial nature of the hearings;

8.

Considers that procedures for monitoring replies by Commissioners-designate during hearings could help improve control and increase the responsibility of the Commission as a whole; calls therefore for a periodic review of the priorities referred to by Commissioners-designate following the start of their term of office;

9.

Considers that the following guidelines should apply for the coordinators’ evaluation meeting after the hearings:

10.

Notes that the 2014 hearings generated more media and public interest than previous hearings, partly because of the evolution of social media; believes that the impact and influence of social media is likely to grow in the future; considers that provision should be made to use social media and networks to include EU citizens more effectively in the hearing process;

11.

Considers that:

12.

Considers that horizontal issues affecting the composition, structure and working methods of the Commission as a whole, which cannot be adequately addressed by an individual Commissioner-designate, are a matter for the Commission President-elect; considers that such issues should be addressed at meetings between the President-elect and the Conference of Presidents (one before the hearing process has started and one after it has ended);

13.

Considers that the scrutiny of Commissioners’ declarations of interests should remain the competence of the Committee on Legal Affairs; considers, however, that the current scope of Commissioners’ declarations of interests is too limited, and invites the Commission to revise its rules on this as soon as possible; considers it important, therefore, that the Committee on Legal Affairs should, in the coming months, issue guidelines in the form of a recommendation or initiative report, with a view to facilitating reform of the procedures relating to Commissioners’ declarations of interests; considers that the declarations of interests and financial interests of the Commissioners should also cover family members living with them in the same household;

14.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

22.9.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/40

—

having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in particular Article 19 thereof,

—

having regard to the European Union’s Strategic Framework on Human Rights and Democracy, adopted by the Council on 25 June 2012 (1),

—

having regard to the EU Human Rights Guidelines on Freedom of Expression Online and Offline, adopted by the Council (Foreign Affairs) on 12 May 2014 (2),

—

having regard to the ‘ICT Sector Guide on Implementing the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights’, published by the Commission in June 2013,

—

having regard to the report by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) of 15 December 2011 entitled ‘Freedom of Expression on the Internet’ (3) and to the regular report of the OSCE Special Representative on Freedom of the Media to the OSCE Permanent Council of 27 November 2014 (4),

—

having regard to the report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, 23 September 2014 (A/69/397) (5),

—

having regard to the report of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights of 30 June 2014 entitled ‘The right to privacy in the digital age’ (6),

—

having regard to the report of the UN Special Rapporteur of 17 April 2013 on the right to freedom of expression and opinion (A/HRC/23/40), analysing the implications of states’ surveillance of communications on the exercise of the human rights to privacy and to freedom of opinion and expression,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe of 26 January 2015 on ‘Mass surveillance’ (7),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2014 on the United States National Security Agency surveillance programme, surveillance bodies in various Member States and their impact on EU citizens’ fundamental rights and on transatlantic cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs (8),

—

having regard to the report by the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, of 21 March 2011, entitled ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework’ (9),

—

having regard to the OECD guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (10) and the 2014 annual report on the OECD guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (11),

—

having regard to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers Annual Report 2013 (12),

—

having regard to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 12 February 2014 entitled ‘Internet Policy and Governance: Europe’s role in shaping the future of Internet Governance’ (13),

—

having regard to the NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement adopted on 24 April 2014 (14),

—

having regard to the Chair’s summary of the ninth Internet Governance Forum held in Istanbul on 2-5 September 2014,

—

having regard to the European Union restrictive measures in force, some of which include embargoes on telecommunications equipment, information and communication technologies (ICTs) and monitoring tools,

—

having regard to Regulation (EU) No 599/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items (15),

—

having regard to the Joint Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the review of the dual-use export control system of 16 April 2014 (16),

—

having regard to the decisions of the 19th Plenary Meeting of the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies, held in Vienna on 3-4 December 2013,

—

having regard to the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 24 April 2014 entitled ‘The review of export control policy: ensuring security and competitiveness in a changing world’ (17),

—

having regard to the Council Conclusions of 21 November 2014 on the review of export control policy,

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 December 2012 on a Digital Freedom Strategy in EU Foreign Policy (18),

—

having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2013 on the freedom of press and media in the world (19),

—

having regard to its resolutions on urgent cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, where they raise concerns regarding digital freedoms,

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2015 on the EU’s priorities for the UN Human Rights Council in 2015 (20),

—

having regard to its resolution of 11 February 2015 on the renewal of the mandate of the Internet Governance Forum (21),

—

having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2015 on the Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2013 and the European Union’s policy on the matter (22),

—

having regard to Edward Snowden’s written statement to the LIBE Committee of March 2014 (23),

—

having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights and the ongoing negotiations on the EU’s accession to the Convention,

—

having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0178/2015),

A.

whereas technological developments and access to the open internet are playing an increasingly important role in enabling and ensuring the fulfilment and full respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, exerting a positive effect by expanding the scope of freedom of expression, access to information, the right to privacy and freedom of assembly and association across the world;

B.

whereas technological systems can be misused as tools for human rights violations through censorship, surveillance, unauthorised access to devices, jamming, interception, and the tracing and tracking of information and individuals;

C.

whereas this is done by public and private actors, including governments and law enforcement bodies as well as criminal organisations and terrorist networks, to violate human rights;

D.

whereas the context in which ICTs are designed and used determines, to a great extent, the impact they can have as a force to advance — or violate — human rights; whereas information technology, especially software, is rarely single-use and usually dual-use as far as the potential to violate human rights is concerned, while software is also a form of speech;

E.

whereas ICTs have been key instruments helping people organise social movements and protests in various countries, especially in countries with authoritative regimes;

F.

whereas the assessment of the implications for human rights of the context in which technologies will be used is determined by the strength of national and regional legal frameworks to regulate the use of technologies and the ability of political and judicial institutions to oversee such use;

G.

whereas, in the digital domain, private actors play an increasingly significant role in all spheres of social activities, but safeguards are still not in place to prevent them from imposing excessive restrictions on fundamental rights and freedoms; whereas, as a result, private actors play a more active role in assessing the legality of content and in developing cyber-security systems and surveillance systems, which can have a detrimental impact on human rights all over the world;

H.

whereas the internet represents a revolution in terms of the possibilities it offers for exchanging data, information and knowledge of all kinds;

I.

whereas encryption is an important method that helps to secure communications and the people using them;

J.

whereas internet governance has benefitted from a multi-stakeholder decision-making model, a process ensuring meaningful, inclusive and accountable participation of all stakeholders, including governments, civil society, technical and academic communities, the private sector and users;

K.

whereas intelligence agencies have systematically undermined cryptographic protocols and products in order to be able to intercept communications and data; whereas the US National Security Agency (NSA) has collected vast numbers of so called ‘zero-day exploits’, that is, IT security vulnerabilities that are not yet known to the public or the product vendor; whereas such activities undermine global efforts to improve IT security;

L.

whereas EU-based intelligence services have engaged in activities that harm human rights;

M.

whereas in the light of the rapid technological developments that are taking place, judicial and democratic oversight and safeguards are largely underdeveloped;

N.

whereas (cyber-)security and counter-terrorism measures involving ICTs, and the monitoring of the internet, can have a significant detrimental effect on the human rights and individual freedoms of people all over the world, including EU citizens when residing or travelling abroad, and especially in the absence of a legal basis that rests on the precepts of necessity, proportionality, and democratic and judicial oversight;

O.

whereas internet filters and communication surveillance undermine the ability of human rights defenders to take advantage of the internet and to communicate sensitive information, and are in breach of several articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) guaranteeing each person’s right to privacy and to freedom of expression;

P.

whereas digital security and digital freedom are both essential and cannot replace one another, but should reinforce one another;

Q.

whereas, when it comes to digital freedoms, the European Union can only lead by example when these freedoms are safeguarded in the EU itself; and whereas adopting the EU data protection package is therefore crucial;

R.

whereas what is at stake are far-reaching social interests — such as the protection of fundamental rights — that should not be determined by the market alone, and that need regulation;

S.

whereas respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law, and effective parliamentary oversight of intelligence services using digital surveillance technology, are important elements of international cooperation;

T.

whereas EU-based companies have an important share of the global market in ICTs, in particular when it comes to exporting surveillance, tracking, intrusion and monitoring technology;

U.

whereas the introduction of export controls should not harm legitimate research into IT security issues, or the development of IT security tools, where there is no criminal intent;

1.

Recognises that human rights and fundamental freedoms are universal and need to be defended globally in every dimension of their expression; stresses that the surveillance of communications, as such, interferes with the rights to privacy and expression, if conducted outside an adequate legal framework;

2.

Calls on the Commission to ensure coherence between the EU’s external actions and its internal policies related to ICTs;

3.

Believes that the active complicity of certain EU Member States in the NSA’s mass surveillance of citizens and spying on political leaders, as revealed by Edward Snowden, has caused serious damage to the credibility of the EU’s human rights policy and has undermined global trust in the benefits of ICTs;

4.

Reminds the Member States and the EU agencies concerned, including Europol and Eurojust, of their obligations under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and in keeping with international human rights law and with the EU’s external policy objectives, not to share intelligence data that may lead to human rights violations in a third country, nor to use information obtained by means of human rights violations, such as unlawful surveillance, outside the EU;

5.

Stresses that the impact of technologies on the improvement of human rights should be mainstreamed in all EU policies and programmes, if applicable, to advance the protection of human rights and the promotion of democracy, the rule of law and good governance, and peaceful conflict resolution;

6.

Calls for the active development and dissemination of technologies that help protect human rights and facilitate people's digital rights and freedoms as well as their security, and that promote best practices and appropriate legislative frameworks, while guaranteeing the security and integrity of personal data; urges, in particular, the EU and its Member States to promote the global use and development of open standards, and of free and open-source software and cryptographic technologies;

7.

Calls on the EU to increase its support for actors who work on strengthening security and privacy protection standards in ICTs at all levels, including hardware, software and communication standards, as well as on developing the hardware and software in privacy-by-design frameworks;

8.

Calls for a human rights and technology fund to be established under the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights;

9.

Urges the EU itself, and in particular the EEAS, to use encryption in its communications with human rights defenders, to avoid putting defenders at risk and to protect its own communications with outsiders from surveillance;

10.

Calls on the EU to adopt free and open-source software, and to encourage other actors to do so, as such software provides for better security and for greater respect for human rights;

11.

Draws attention to the importance of developing ICTs in conflict areas to promote peacebuilding activities with a view to providing secure communication between parties involved in peaceful resolution of conflicts;

12.

Calls for the implementation of conditions, benchmarks and reporting procedures so as to ensure that EU financial and technical support to the development of new technologies in third countries is not used in ways that infringe on human rights;

13.

Calls on the Commission and the Council to engage actively with third country governments, and to further support, train and empower human rights defenders, civil society activists and independent journalists using ICTs in their activities in a safe manner, by means of the existing European support mechanisms and policy instruments, and to promote related fundamental rights of privacy, such as unrestricted access to information on the internet, the right to privacy and data protection, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of association and freedom of the press and publication online;

14.

Draws attention to the plight of whistleblowers and their supporters, including journalists, following their revelations of abusive surveillance practices in third countries; believes that such individuals should be considered human rights defenders and that, as such, they deserve the EU’s protection, as required under the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders; reiterates its call on the Commission and the Member States to examine thoroughly the possibility of granting whistleblowers international protection from prosecution;

15.

Deplores the fact that security measures, including counterterrorism measures, are increasingly used as pretexts for violations of the right to privacy and for clamping down on the legitimate activities of human rights defenders, journalists and political activists; reiterates its strong belief that national security can never be a justification for untargeted, secret or mass surveillance programmes; insists that such measures be pursued strictly in line with the rule of law and human rights standards, including the right to privacy and data protection;

16.

Calls on the EEAS and the Commission to promote the democratic oversight of security and intelligence services in its political dialogue with third countries, as well as in its development cooperation programmes; urges the Commission to support civil society organisations and legislative bodies in third countries that seek to enhance the scrutiny, transparency and accountability of domestic security services; calls for specific commitments thereon to be included in the future EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democratisation;

17.

Urges the Council and the Commission to promote digital freedoms and unrestricted access to the internet in all forms of contact with third countries, including in accession negotiations, trade negotiations, human rights dialogues and diplomatic contacts;

18.

Recognises that the internet has become a public space as well as a marketplace, for which the free flow of information and access to ICTs are indispensable; stresses, therefore, that digital freedom and free trade must be promoted and protected simultaneously;

19.

Calls for the inclusion of clauses in all agreements with third countries that refer explicitly to the need to promote, guarantee and respect digital freedoms, net neutrality, uncensored and unrestricted access to the internet, privacy rights and the protection of data;

20.

Urges the EU to counter the criminalisation of human rights defenders’ use of encryption, censorship-bypassing and privacy tools, by refusing to limit the use of encryption within the EU, and to challenge third-country governments that level such charges against human rights defenders;

21.

Urges the EU to counter the criminalisation of the use of encryption, anti-censorship and privacy tools by refusing to limit the use of encryption within the EU, and by challenging third-country governments that criminalise such tools;

22.

Stresses that an effective EU development and human rights policy will require the mainstreaming of ICTs, and the bridging of the digital divide, by providing basic technological infrastructure, by facilitating access to knowledge and information to promote digital skills, and by promoting the use of open standards in documents and the use of free and open-source software, where appropriate, to ensure openness and transparency (especially by public institutions) — including the safeguarding of data protection in the digital realm all over the world — as well as a better understanding of the potential risks and benefits of ICTs;

23.

Calls on the Commission to support the elimination of digital barriers for people with disabilities; considers it extremely important that EU policies on the development of and promotion of human rights in the world should aim at mitigating the digital divide for people with disabilities, and to provide a broader framework of rights, particularly as regards access to knowledge, digital participation and inclusion in the new economic and social opportunities created by the internet;

24.

Underlines that the lawful digital collection and dissemination of evidence of human rights violations can contribute to the global fight against impunity and terrorism; considers that such material should be admissible, in duly justified cases under international (criminal) law, as evidence in court proceedings, in line with international, regional and constitutional safeguards; recommends that mechanisms be created in the field of international criminal law for the introduction of procedures through which such data is authenticated and collected for use as proof in court proceedings;

25.

Deplores the fact that some EU-made information and communication technologies and services are sold, and can be used, in third countries by private individuals, businesses and authorities with the specific intent of violating human rights by means of censorship, mass surveillance, jamming, interception and monitoring, and by tracing and tracking citizens and their activities on (mobile) telephone networks and the internet; is concerned about the fact that some EU-based companies may provide technologies and services that can enable such human rights violations;

26.

Notes that threats to the security of the European Union and its Member States, and to third countries, often come from individuals or small groups using digital communication networks to plan and carry out attacks, and that the tools and tactics required to defeat such threats need to be reviewed and updated constantly;

27.

Considers mass surveillance that is not justified by a heightened risk of terrorist attacks and threats to be in violation of the principles of necessity and proportionality, and, therefore, a violation of human rights;

28.

Urges the Member States to promote full democratic scrutiny of the operations of intelligence services in third countries, to verify that these services operate in full respect of the rule of law, and to hold to account those services and individuals operating in unlawful ways;

29.

Encourages the Member States, in the light of the increased cooperation and information exchange between Member States and third countries (including through the use of digital surveillance), to ensure democratic scrutiny of these services, and of their activities, through appropriate internal, executive, judicial and independent parliamentary oversight;

30.

Stresses that corporate social responsibility principles and human rights by design criteria, which are technological solutions and innovations protecting human rights, should be adopted in EU law to ensure that internet service providers (ISPs), software developers, hardware producers, social networking services/media, mobile phone carriers and others consider the human rights of end users globally;

31.

Urges the EU to ensure greater transparency in the relationship between mobile phone carriers or ISPs and governments, and to call for it in its relations with third countries, by demanding that carriers and ISPs publish yearly detailed transparency reports, including reports on requested actions by authorities, as well as on financial ties between public authorities and carriers/ISPs;

32.

Reminds corporate actors of their responsibility to respect human rights throughout their global operations, regardless of where their users are located and independently of whether the host state meets its own human rights obligations; calls on ICT companies, notably those based in the EU, to implement the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, including through the establishment of due diligence policies and risk management safeguards, and the provision of effective remedies when their activities have caused or contributed to an adverse human rights impact;

33.

Stresses the need to implement and monitor EU regulations and sanctions relating to ICTs more effectively, including the use of catch-all mechanisms, so as to ensure that all parties, including the Member States, comply with legislation and that a level playing field is preserved;

34.

Stresses the fact that respect for fundamental rights is an essential element in successful counter-terrorism policies, including the use of digital surveillance technologies;

35.

Welcomes the December 2013 Wassenaar Arrangement decision on export controls in the areas of surveillance, law enforcement and intelligence-gathering tools and network surveillance systems; recalls the still very incomplete nature of the EU dual-use regime, namely the EU dual-use regulation, when it comes to the effective and systematic export control of harmful ICT technologies to non-democratic countries;

36.

Urges the Commission, in the context of the forthcoming dual-use policy review and renewal, swiftly to put forward a proposal for smart and effective policies to limit and regulate the commercial export of services regarding the implementation and use of so-called dual-use technologies, addressing potentially harmful exports of ICT products and services to third countries, as agreed in the Joint Statement of the European Parliament, Council and Commission of April 2014; calls on the Commission to include effective safeguards to prevent any harm of these export controls to research, including scientific and IT security research;

37.

Stresses that the Commission should swiftly be able to provide companies that are in doubt as to whether to apply for an export licence with accurate and up-to-date information on the legality or potentially harmful effects of potential transactions;

38.

Calls on the Commission to submit proposals for a review of how EU standards on ICTs could be used to prevent the potentially harmful impacts of the export of such technologies or other services to third countries where concepts such as ‘lawful interception’ cannot be considered equivalent to those of the European Union, or, for example, that have a poor record on human rights or where the rule of law does not exist;

39.

Reaffirms that EU standards, particularly the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, should prevail in assessments of incidents involving dual-use technologies used in ways that may restrict human rights;

40.

Calls for the development of policies to regulate the sales of zero-day exploits and vulnerabilities to avoid their being used for cyber-attacks, or for unauthorised access to devices leading to human rights violations, without such regulations having a meaningful impact on academic and otherwise bona fide security research;

41.

Deplores the active co-operation of certain European companies, as well as of international companies trading in dual-use technologies with potential detrimental effects on human rights while operating in the EU, with regimes whose actions violate human rights;

42.

Urges the Commission publicly to exclude companies engaging in such activities from EU procurement procedures, from research and development funding and from any other financial support;

43.

Calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to human rights aspects in the public procurement processes for technological equipment, especially in countries with unreliable practises in this domain;

44.

Calls on the Commission and Council actively to defend the open internet, multi-stakeholder decision-making procedures, net neutrality, digital freedoms and data protection safeguards in third countries through internet governance fora;

45.

Condemns the weakening and undermining of encryption protocols and products, particularly by intelligence services seeking to intercept encrypted communications;

46.

Warns against the privatisation of law enforcement through internet companies and ISPs;

47.

Calls for a clarification of the norms and standards used by private actors to develop their systems;

48.

Recalls the importance of assessing the context within which technologies are used, in order to fully appreciate their human rights impact;

49.

Calls explicitly for the promotion of tools enabling the anonymous and/or pseudonymous use of the internet, and challenges the one-sided view that such tools serve only to allow criminal activities, and not to empower human rights activists beyond and within the EU;

50.

Urges the Council, the Commission and the EEAS to develop smart and effective policies to regulate the export of dual-use technologies, addressing potentially harmful exports of ICT products and services, at international level and within multilateral export control regimes and other international bodies;

51.

Stresses that any regulatory changes aimed at increasing the effectiveness of export controls of intangible technology transfers must not inhibit legitimate research, or access to and exchange of information, and that any potential measures, such as the use of EU General Export Authorisations for dual-use research, should not have a ‘chilling effect’ on individuals or SMEs;

52.

Calls on the Member States to ensure that existing and future export control policies do not restrict the activities of legitimate security researchers, and that export controls are applied in good faith, and only to clearly defined technologies intended to be used for mass surveillance, censorship, jamming, interception or monitoring purposes, or for tracing and tracking citizens and their activities on (mobile) telephone networks;

53.

Recalls that mesh-based, ad hoc wireless technologies offer great potential in providing backup networks in areas where the internet is unavailable or blocked, and can help the advancement of human rights;

54.

Calls on the Commission to appoint an independent group of experts that can perform a human rights impact assessment on existing EU standards for ICTs, with the goal of making recommendations for adjustments that will increase the protection of human rights, particularly when systems are exported;

55.

Recognises that technological development poses a challenge to legal systems, requiring them to adjust to new circumstances; underlines the importance of law makers paying more attention to issues pertaining to the digital economy;

56.

Calls on the Commission to involve civil society as well as independent experts, including security researchers, in the ICT field in third countries, to ensure up-to-date expertise that should result in future-proof policy making;

57.

Underlines the need to avoid unintended consequences, such as restrictions or chilling effects on scientific and other types of bona fide research and development, on the exchange of and access to information, on the development of security knowledge or on the export of technologies that are in the interest of acquiring the requisite digital skills and of advancing human rights;

58.

Believes that cooperation between governments and private actors worldwide in the digital domain, including the Internet Governance Forum, calls for clear checks and balances and must not lead to the undermining of democratic and judicial oversight;

59.

Notes that a voluntary approach is not enough, and that binding measures are required to encourage companies to take into account a country’s human rights record before selling their products there, and to carry out an assessment of the effect their technologies will have on human rights defenders and government critics;

60.

Is of the opinion that the export of highly sensitive goods must be checked before they leave the EU, and that penalties are necessary in the event of violations;

61.

Calls for each individual to be entitled to encryption, and for the conditions needed to allow encryption to be created; takes the view that controls should be a matter for the end user, who will need the skills required to carry out such controls properly;

62.

Calls for the introduction of ‘end to end’ encryption standards as a matter of course for all communication services, so as to make it more difficult for governments, intelligence agencies and surveillance bodies to read content;

63.

Emphasises the special responsibility of government intelligence services to build trust, and calls for an end to mass surveillance; considers that the monitoring of European citizens through domestic and foreign intelligence services must be addressed and stopped;

64.

Is opposed to the sale and distribution of European surveillance technology and censorship tools to authoritarian regimes under which the rule of law does not exist;

65.

Calls for the scope for international protection of whistleblowers to be extended, and encourages the Member States to table laws to protect whistleblowers;

66.

Calls for a UN envoy for digital liberties and data protection to be appointed, and for the brief of the EU Commissioner for Human Rights to be extended, such that technology is also considered from a human-rights angle;

67.

Calls for measures to ensure that the privacy of activists, journalists and citizens is protected everywhere in the world and that they are able to network via the internet;

68.

Insists that internet access should be recognised as a human right, and calls for measures to eliminate the digital divide;

69.

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, and the EEAS.

22.9.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/51

—

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

—

having regard to Opinion No 1/2012 of the European Court of Auditors on certain proposals for regulations relating to the common agricultural policy for the period 2014-2020,

—

having regard to Opinion No 2/2004 of the European Court of Auditors on the single audit model,

—

having regard to Special Report No 16/2013 of the European Court of Auditors, entitled ‘Taking stock of “single audit” and the Commission’s reliance on the work of national audit authorities in cohesion’,

—

having regard to the 2013 annual activity report of the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development,

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (A8-0240/2015),

A.

whereas over the two rounds of common agricultural policy (CAP) reforms the rules have become more diverse and complex;

B.

whereas more complex rules lead to more errors on the ground;

C.

whereas the objectives of the CAP have to be fulfilled, while mutual understanding and trust between all the EU institutions and national and regional bodies must be ensured for the effective implementation of the CAP;

D.

whereas a more effective and efficient CAP reform requires simplification and less bureaucracy in order to meet the CAP’s objectives;

E.

whereas the cost of controls and of providing advice to stakeholders and farmers is currently estimated at EUR 4 billion annually at Member State level, and is likely to rise, as could error rates, with the implementation of the latest CAP reform, in particular the introduction of ‘greening’ measures;

F.

whereas the 2013 reform has resulted in significant changes in the data required from farmers to accompany applications and justify claims, with new requirements which risk bringing about a higher error rate in the initial learning and adaptation phase;

G.

whereas it is important that operators are not burdened with a disproportionate number of inspections;

H.

whereas the objectives of the CAP have to be fulfilled, while the mutual understanding and trust between all EU institutions, national and regional bodies have to be ensured for the effective implementation of the CAP;

I.

whereas farmers are incentivised to provide services such as landscapes, farmland biodiversity and climate stability even though they have no market value;

J.

whereas the cost of controls and providing advice to stakeholders and farmers may be currently estimated at EUR 4 billion at Member State level; emphasises the need to minimise the cost of controls and their bureaucratic burden;

K.

whereas performance-based controls may become a useful methodology, while stability and an enabling approach are needed on the part of administrative bodies in order to build trust with final beneficiaries; recalls however that a one-size-fits-all system cannot be imposed on the diverse types and scale of agricultural holdings in the EU;

L.

whereas greening measures introduced by the last reform of the common agricultural policy aim to achieve improved agricultural sustainability through the effect of various instruments:

M.

whereas the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (1) judged it was necessary to issue 51 reservations for some paying agencies;

1.

Shares the opinion expressed by the European Court of Auditors that ‘the arrangements for the common agricultural policy spending for the period 2014-2020 continue to be complex’ (2); recalls nonetheless that the complexity of the CAP is due to the diversity of farming in Europe, and that simplification must not result in a dismantling of the instruments that have been adopted;

2.

Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP with a view to reducing the error rate and for instruments to be established which will make it possible to distinguish between error and fraud;

3.

Calls for a distinction to be drawn, when use is made of the findings of checks and as regards the possible imposition of penalties, between unintentional omissions and cases of fraud, as omissions do not as a rule cause any financial damage to the taxpayer;

4.

Calls for a less bureaucratic CAP that can be implemented and interpreted clearly, with a view to reducing the error rate and to establishing instruments that will make it possible to distinguish between error and fraud, while ensuring that farmers are still able to deliver the vital food production which is at the heart of the policy; believes that continuing to tackle complexity and that streamlining the CAP is one of the key elements for attracting new entrants to agriculture and also for retaining them and their skills so as to ensure a thriving EU agricultural sector in the future; expects strong measures from the better regulation programme in this respect; welcomes the Commission’s decision to extend the deadline for direct payment requests by one month and considers it a step towards reducing the CAP error rate;

5.

Urges that clearer guidance be given to both national authorities and farmers in order to reduce the error rate;

6.

Supports the Commission’s initiative of simplifying the CAP with immediate examination of measures which can be implemented quickly, as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; urges also that at the mid-term review, proposals for amendments to the basic legislative act be brought forward for consideration for the reform for the next funding period;

7.

Fears that the most likely error rate determined by the Court of Auditors will increase in the common agricultural policy direct payments area during the period 2014-2020, owing in particular to the fact that the next framework for cross-compliance does not yet correspond to a reduction in the level of needless complexity of this policy for the managing authorities or for the beneficiaries;

8.

Recalls that Parliament and the Court of Auditors have often stressed the necessity of striking the right balance between less administrative burden and effective financial control;

9.

Notes that the costs of the common agricultural policy controls already amount to EUR 4 billion a year and that they concern 50 million transactions with a budget for agriculture of around EUR 58 billion;

10.

Welcomes the fact that the Commission is giving priority to a new CAP simplification exercise and that it is proposing, firstly, to simplify a number of delegated and implementing acts;

11.

Favours strongly an improvement in the quality and consistency of inspections rather than an increase in the number of controls in agriculture by the Member States, the Commission and the Court of Auditors;

12.

Emphasises also that controls are a guarantee that money from the EU budget earmarked for the funding of CAP instruments is being properly spent;

13.

Recalls that the objective of the single audit scheme is to put in place a single chain of audits from the final beneficiaries to the European Union institutions;

14.

Finds regrettable that the single audit scheme is not yet effective and that control systems set up by the Member States do not function to their full potential; reminds the Member States of their responsibility to provide the effective first level of controls while minimising the burden on farmers, and of the existing options for introducing flexibility when organising controls;

15.

Encourages the Commission and the Member States, as a guideline, to find ways to optimise and combine CAP-related inspections so that chosen beneficiaries would, whenever possible, be subjected to only one round of controls annually;

16.

Stresses that according to the annual report of the European Court of Auditors for the financial year 2013:

17.

Deplores the fact that the Commission had to correct upwards the error rates communicated by 42 out of 68 paying agencies with a residual error rate above 2 %, despite the fact that almost all the paying agencies for the direct payments were accredited and certified by the certifying authorities and despite the fact that 79 of the 82 statements of assurance made by the paying agencies received an unqualified opinion from the certification bodies in 2013;

18.

Expects that the new mission assigned to the certification bodies by Regulations (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 and (EU) No 1306/2013 will improve the reliability of the data communicated by the Member States as regards their management of the EU agricultural funds;

19.

Calls on the Commission to amend the guidelines for certification bodies in order to verify more closely the compilation of statistical reports;

20.

Reiterates its demand to the Commission to draft proposals with a view to sanctioning false or incorrect reporting by paying agencies, including the three following dimensions, namely inspection statistics, statements by the paying agencies, and the work carried out by the certification bodies; asks that the Commission be empowered to withdraw the accreditation of the paying agencies in cases of grave misrepresentations;

21.

Expects the Commission to urgently make full use of the process of simplification of the CAP, especially with regard to the burdensome and complex regulations governing cross-compliance and greening which ultimately impacts upon farmers across Europe;

22.

Supports the Commission’s initiative of simplifying the CAP through the immediate consideration of measures which can be implemented quickly, as this would benefit farmers, paying agencies, EU institutions and taxpayers; urges also that proposals for amendments to the basic legislative act be brought forward; calls on the Commission to come forward with concrete proposals for simplifying the CAP, taking into consideration the feedback from stakeholders in the agricultural sector;

23.

Advocates the reinforcement and stronger implementation of the single audit through the coordination of the control activities carried out by the various institutions, and calls for the administrative burden arising from audits to be lightened so that farmers are not subjected to different visits on separate occasions by the bodies responsible or to excessive or multiple controls by the Commission and the Court of Auditors in the same year, under any and all regulations, which would thus reduce the burden on farmers by decreasing the number of inspections; calls for the bundling of the audit tasks and controls carried out by certifying bodies and other Member State bodies; notes that the advice given by both national authorities and the Commission in guidelines to farmers for implementing the CAP is often contradicted by the assessment criteria used by the Court of Auditors, resulting in fines that are both disproportionate and unexpected;

24.

Favours an integrated approach to controls, whereby all the controls required on a given farm are carried out at the same time wherever possible, so that the number of onsite visits is kept low and the concomitant financial and time cost and burden for administrations and farmers can be reduced and the control process streamlined;

25.

Reminds the Commission that the risk of unintentional errors owing to complex regulation is in the end borne by the beneficiary; calls for a reasonable, proportional and effective policy on sanctions to support this approach, such as avoiding double sanctioning for the same error under both the payment scheme and cross-compliance;

26.

Believes that, in order to ensure smooth project implementation, payments should not be interrupted when minor and/or clerical errors are identified;

27.

Requests that the Commission, the Member States and the Court of Auditors further develop risk-based audit strategies factoring in all relevant data, including prior identification of the best/worst performers per policy area;

28.

Emphasises that criteria should be developed in order to define which Member States are identified as best/worst performers;

29.

Recalls that a large spectrum of Member States can be considered as ‘worst performing’ as regards EU funds management, depending on the policy area concerned;

30.

Insists that the definition of performance in respect of controls should be based on a checklist and primarily entail the quality of the Member States’ checks and administrative systems, i.e. the efficiency, consistency and reliability of the managing and certifying authorities;

31.

Considers that the best performing Member States in each policy area should be rewarded by a reduction in Union controls;

32.

Believes that the development and administration of performance-based controls should in no way become a source of increased uncertainty as regards the security of the EU’s food supply;

33.

Calls the best performing Member States to share their experience with the worst performing Member States;

34.

Requests that the Commission encourage the exchange of best practices, so as to ensure the smoothest possible controls and the least possible disturbance to farmers;

35.

Notes that, in accordance with Article 59(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy, ‘Member States shall ensure a minimum level of on-the-spot checks needed for an effective management of the risks, and shall increase that minimum level where necessary. Member States may reduce that minimum level where the management and control systems function properly and the error rates remain at an acceptable level’;

36.

Asks the Commission to further define the acceptable level referred to in Article 59(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 and to initiate a dialogue with Parliament and the European Court of Auditors in this regard;

37.

Encourages the Member States to develop further e-government initiatives aimed at reducing the error rate by preventing mistakes in the application phase as a mid- to long-term objective; calls upon the Commission and the Member States to respect the target date, as provided for in Article 122(3) of the Common Provision Regulation, to switch to e-cohesion in project application, management and control; believes that full data transparency and accessibility are essential to prevent and combat any abuse; calls in this connection on the Commission to make mandatory the publication of documentation provided by all beneficiaries;

38.

Believes that complete fast broadband coverage of rural areas, with significant awareness-raising and training in its use, will be an essential tool in enabling all farmers to benefit from the newest CAP application and claims systems;

39.

Calls for further efforts to reduce the complexity of application systems and forms for farmers, and favours the increased use of e-government technology by the Member States in order to forestall errors in the application process, which will require broadband internet access for beneficiaries; encourages the Commission to create a programme to help educate older farmers; stresses the robust investments in broadband networks in rural areas and calls on the Member States to strive towards the digitisation of the application process; recalls that the reliable implementation of e-government technologies requires the Member States to develop, finance or co-finance such technology;

40.

Calls on the Member States to implement digitisation programmes as regards the relationship between government and agricultural holdings, with a view to obtaining a ‘single farm file’ involving the integrated and synchronous management of crop data; takes the view that such a simplification would aggregate items that are currently managed separately (crop plans, individual insurance plans and logbooks), as farms would make a single declaration that would then be shared between government departments, which would lead to greater efficiency in checks by those departments and thus to a reduced risk of payment errors and to the streamlining of controls;

41.

Calls on Member States to ensure that the governmental/regional bodies dealing with the new CAP implementation communicate and work together effectively to the benefit of farmers implementing the policy on the ground;

42.

Considers the long-term potential benefits of developing and adopting industrial internet -based solutions in both farming and controls, especially as regards integrated solutions for beneficiaries and paying agencies, to be numerous; expects this to impact positively on the consistency, reliability and cost-efficiency of controls; urges the Commission to adopt and execute pilot projects in this field; recalls that this approach is dependent on Member State commitment to delivering fast broadband connections to rural areas throughout the EU;

43.

Invites the Commission to cooperate with all relevant stakeholders, including, but not limited to, the Court of Auditors, the Member States and the beneficiaries’ organisations, in preparing a long-term strategy that would seek to address non-policy related ways of keeping the burden on beneficiaries and inspectors from increasing further following future CAP reforms and changes to the basic acts;

44.

Asks the Commission to respect the principle of controllability already in force in rural development when drafting, in accordance with Article 46 of Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013, a proposal for a legislative act relating to the Ecological Focus Area;

45.

Asks the Commission to address the issue of the reduction of the minimum level of controls foreseen in Article 59 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 in the evaluation report foreseen in Article 110 of this same regulation on monitoring and evaluation of the CAP;

46.

Asks the Commission to draft a communication on the possibility of introducing performance-based management systems in all areas of the CAP, especially in the investment part of rural development, in order to initiate a debate with all the stakeholders with a view to introducing this principle in EU legislation;

47.

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

22.9.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/57

—

having regard to Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

—

having regard to the criteria set by the Commission in 2003 for defining small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs),

—

having regard to the Commission’s ‘Entrepreneurship 2020 Action Plan’ (COM(2012)0795),

—

having regard to the 2009 Report of the Group of Experts for the European Commission ‘Overview of family-business-relevant issues: research, policy measures and existing studies’,

—

having regard to its resolution of 5 February 2013 on improving access to finance for SMEs (1),

—

having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2014 on reindustrialising Europe to promote competitiveness and sustainability (2),

—

having regard to the Commission communication entitled ‘Think Small First’: A ‘Small Business Act for Europe’ (COM(2008)0394),

—

having regard to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality (A8-0223/2015),

A.

whereas property is protected under Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

B.

whereas family businesses in general have in the past made a large contribution to a surge in the European economy and play a significant role in economic growth and social development, in reducing unemployment, particularly among young people, and in investment in human capital; whereas the multi-generational character of family businesses reinforces the stability of the economy; whereas family businesses usually play a vital role in regional development, in terms of employment, transmission of know-how and regional organisation; whereas family-business-targeted policies could encourage entrepreneurship and motivate European families to start their own family businesses;

C.

whereas, according to the Ernst and Young Family Business Yearbook 2014, 85 % of all European companies are family businesses and these account for 60 % of jobs in the private sector;

D.

whereas family businesses are of various sizes, which exposes them to different difficulties and problems;

E.

whereas, while most family businesses are SMEs, family businesses can be small, medium-sized or large, listed or unlisted; whereas they have been widely equated to SMEs, neglecting the fact that there are also very large multinational corporations that are family businesses; whereas in some EU Member States a few family businesses account for a large share of the total turnover of all businesses and thus make a significant contribution to job retention, including in times of crisis, to creation and growth and to the economic success of the country concerned; whereas many family businesses that no longer meet the definition of SMEs, but are also far from being major corporations, are ineligible for specific funding opportunities and some administrative exemptions; whereas this inevitably leads to unnecessary red tape, which is a great burden, especially for these mid-cap family businesses;

F.

whereas a considerable number of family businesses are active in more than one country, meaning that the family business model has a transnational dimension;

G.

whereas, direct taxation and succession law are Member State competences, and whereas some Member States have adopted measures to support family businesses and address their concerns;

H.

whereas family businesses are perceived as exhibiting high integrity and values that guide their business operations, and introduce high standards of corporate social responsibility towards their employees and the environment, which also creates a favourable environment for work-life balance; whereas family businesses usually guarantee that knowledge and skills will be passed on and in some cases play an important role in social links;

I.

whereas in agriculture family farms are the most common business model and make a major contribution to the prevention of rural depopulation, and in many cases provide the only source of employment in the regions of Europe where development is lagging behind, particularly in less industrialised regions; whereas family farms can offer a template for success because in general they put the principle of the environmentally and socially sustainable circular-flow economy into practice, and because in that context women as leaders contribute not only entrepreneurial thinking, but also specific communication and social skills;

J.

whereas the Commission’s group of experts on family businesses completed its work more than five years ago, and no new European initiative has been launched since then at EU level; whereas there is still a lack of research and data at national and European level to understand the special needs and structures of family businesses;

K.

whereas there is no legally binding, concrete, simple and harmonised Europe-wide definition of ‘family business’;

L.

whereas it is impossible, owing to the lack of a definition, to gather comparable data in the EU Member States in order to draw attention to the special situation, needs and economic accomplishment of family businesses; whereas this lack of reliable and comparable data can hinder policy decision-making and may mean that the needs of family businesses are not being met;

M.

whereas family businesses, beyond their economic significance, also play an important role in social terms;

N.

whereas not all 28 EU Member States have interest group associations or other structures that specifically cater for the needs of family businesses;

O.

whereas EU-level efforts in stimulating entrepreneurship and start-ups should be enhanced and complemented with greater consideration for facilitating and stimulating the long-term survival of family businesses;

P.

whereas the family business model is unevenly spread across the Member States; whereas a significant share of family businesses in Europe have a transnational dimension and carry out their activities in different Member States;

Q.

whereas in the EU women earn, on average, 16 % less per hour than men and there is a dearth of women in high-level and leadership positions, and whereas the labour practices and wage systems applied to men are not the same as those applied to women, making it more difficult for the latter to be financially independent, participate fully in the job market and achieve a work-life balance;

R.

whereas women often play an invisible role, or act as figureheads, and do not have their job or salary status appropriately recognised, which has serious repercussions in terms of social security contributions, pensions and welfare entitlements and also in terms of recognition of their skills, as demonstrated by the data on the gender pay gap and pension gap (3);

1.

Emphasises that family businesses tend to demonstrate a high degree of social responsibility towards their staff and manage resources actively and responsibly, and that they generally take a sustainable and long-term approach to the economic future of the business (by acting as ‘honourable merchant’, responsible owner or steward) and thus make an important contribution both to their local communities and to Europe’s competitiveness, and create and maintain high-quality jobs;

2.

Stresses that, because of their history, family businesses are strongly rooted in a particular location and thus also create and maintain jobs in rural and less-favoured areas, contributing to the fight against the process of ageing and depopulation by which many areas in the EU are affected; calls on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to provide the necessary cost-efficient infrastructure in order to ensure the competitiveness, renewal, growth and sustainability of such businesses, in particular micro-entities and start-ups, and to facilitate cross-sectoral and cross-border collaboration, thus helping them to grow and internationalise;

3.

Recognises that family businesses are the single biggest source of employment in the private sector and that therefore what is beneficial to continuity, renewal and growth in the family business sector is conducive to continuity, renewal and growth in the European economy;

4.

Notes that highly specialised family businesses in particular play an important role as suppliers to, and innovators for, larger companies and that, given their long-term and intergenerational approach to business, they provide the companies they supply with material security and thereby make a significant contribution to economic growth;

5.

Reminds the Commission of the fact that the majority of family businesses are SMEs (4) and that applying the ‘think small first’ principle is therefore essential in order to better adapt EU legislation to the realities and needs of these businesses, and to enable them to benefit from funding programmes and a reduction in red tape;