Summary of the meeting of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Brussels, 5-6 May 2008

Inhoud

Delen

enveloppe
  1. Tekst
  2. Originele weergave
  1. Meer informatie

1.

Tekst

Subject : Summary of the meeting of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Brussels, 5-6 May 2008

th

Mr LAMBRINIDIS (PSE, EL) chaired the 5 of May meeting and Mr DEPREZ (ALDE, BE) th

chaired the 6 of May meeting.

I. Consideration of reports as leading committee

  • a) 
    Exchanges between the Member States of information extracted from the criminal record 2005/0267(CNS) 05968/2008 ­ C6-0067/2008

Rapporteur: Agustín DIAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA (EPP­ED, ES)

­ Consideration of draft report

The rapporteur introduced his draft report and welcomed the fact that many of the proposals

contained in Parliament's 21 June 2007 report have been accepted. However, he drew the

attention of the Committee to the proposal for a single legal framework for the protection of

personal data which is identical to the one originally formulated by the Commission. The

Parliament's initiatives in this field have not been taken into account. Therefore, he decided to

table the same amendments as in the past on this point. Serious thinking must be done on the

information-exchange system and on the access by educational establishments to information

regarding offences committed against children registered in the criminal record of job

applicants.

Speakers supported the draft report and emphasised the necessity for agencies within Member

States to understand the utility of the exchange of information.

The Commission's representative announced that a proposal for the implementation of the

framework directive will be adopted shortly (20-21 May).

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 13 May 2008

  • b) 
    Use of the Visa Information System (VIS) under the Schengen Borders Code 2008/0041(COD) COM(2008)0101 ­ C6-0086/2008 Rapporteur: Mihael BREJC (EPP­ED, SI)

­ Consideration of draft report

The presentation of the draft report was followed by an exchange of views with the

Presidency, the Commission and the other members of the Committee.

The Commission's representative recalled the context of the proposal, emphasised the need to

have a systematic use of the VIS at the borders and referred to the intention of the

Commission to amend the Consular Instructions. The transitional period of three years should

allow Member States to implement the VIS. The Commission will publish a report on this

matter at the end of the transitional period.

Members of the Committee addressed the following issues:

· The importance of having a coherent approach in administrating EU borders: an

unified and harmonised system, systematic checks but possibility to waive

controls by the person in command of the border in certain circumstances, respect

of the proportionality principle;

· The need to maintain the responsibility on the Member States.

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 14 May 2008

  • c) 
    Joint debate on the following reports, consideration of draft reports:
  • i) 
    Accession of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the EU, the EC and Switzerland on Switzerland's association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis 2006/0251(CNS) COM(2006)0752 ­ C6-0089/2008
  • ii) 
    Accession of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the EC and Switzerland concerning the establishment of the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland 2006/0252(CNS) COM(2006)0754 ­ C6-0090/2008 iii) Protocol between the EC, Switzerland and Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the EC and Switzerland concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State, in Switzerland or Liechtenstein 2006/0257(CNS) COM(2006)0753 ­ C6-0091/2008

Rapporteur: Ewa KLAMT (EPP­ED, DE)

The rapporteur introduced her drafts and emphasised that the European Parliament can not

just be consulted on the proposals. It should give its assent.

Several members of the Committee welcomed the report.

According to the representative of the Commission, the same approach was followed as for

the Agreement with Switzerland. The mixed Committee have no legislative powers, which

belong to the Council.

The Slovenian Presidency informed the Committee that the Council would like to proceed

with this file quickly.

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 13 May 2008

  • d) 
    Conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of highly qualified employment 2007/0228(CNS) COM(2007)0637 ­ C6-0011/2008

Rapporteur: Ewa KLAMT (EPP­ED, DE)

­ Consideration of two working documents

The rapporteur announced that her report should be finished under the French presidency. According to her, the criteria for migration and the question of minimum salary are the critical

points of the proposal. She emphasised the added value of the proposal, which will offer an

uniform access to the EU market via the "blue card" system.

The interventions of different members of the Committee concerned:

· The definition of "highly qualified workers"/ "skilled workers";

· The minimum salary requirement;

· The possible advantages of the proposal in relation with the present situation and

the need to have an European approach instead of 27 different positions;

· The necessity to provide means for retaining in the EU its own highly

qualified/skilled workers;

· The situation of the new Member States: could their nationals be discriminated

against in relation with third countries nationals that would benefit from the "blue

card" system?

The Commission's representative referred namely to the Accession treaties that protect new

Member States nationals from discrimination in relation with third countries nationals.

The Slovenian Presidency announced that the adoption of the directive could take place

before the end of 2008 and presented the state of play of the dossier in the competent working

group of the Council.

Timetable

Seminar on this subject: end of June 2008 Discussion among rapporteurs: Mid-July 2008

Vote in the Committee: September/October 2008 e) Protection of the euro against counterfeiting 2007/0192(CNS) COM(2007)0525 ­ C6-0431/2007

Rapporteur: Agustín DIAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA (EPP­ED, ES)

­ Consideration of draft report

The rapporteur informed the Committee that he took into consideration certain proposals of

the Commission and of the European Central Bank. He emphasized the need to differentiate

between Members States of the euro-zone and Member States not belonging to it but using the

euro for financial transactions, as well as between the different types of undertakings dealing

with euros. According to him, the timetable suggested by the Commission for the

authentification procedures is too ambitious.

The Commission's representative welcomed the draft report but drew the attention of the

Committee to the fact that the rapporteur proposes to broaden the scope of the regulation in

order to cover establishments handling euros outside the euro-zone; to extend the definition of

the establishments concerned; and to modify the status of the counterfeits seized as evidence

in criminal cases. The Commission would prefer, on this last point, a more neutral wording.

The European Central Bank's representative welcomed the report, namely the proposal that

counterfeited euros seized in Member States be also immediately transmitted to the ECB, if

their volume so permits. She expressed doubts about the possibility of extending the

application of the Regulation outside the euro-zone. Concerning the 2001 deadline, it is

artificial to impose a deadline in the Regulation, since the technical deadlines are fixed by the

ECB.

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 9 June 2008

Rapporteur: Sophia IN 'T VELD (ALDE, NL)

­ Presentation by the Slovenian Presidency on the latest developments The rapporteur asked questions about the procedure and the timetable of the examination of

the dossier in the Council; the access to documents linked to the negotiation of the EU-US

Agreement; the obligation for the carriers to verify the data collected from individuals; the

data protection arrangements. She also urged for interinstitutional cooperation at political

level, namely on both the PNR and the framework directive. She announced that on 15 May

2008, a hearing of experts on this issue will be organised.

The Slovenian Presidency presented the state of play of the dossier in the Council and

answered the questions of the rapporteur. He informed the Committee that some Members of

the Council were in favour of the inclusion of serious crimes in the scope of application of the

framework decision and of the extension of the modes of transport concerned. Some Members

of the Council also expressed the view that the Commission's proposal on the sensitive PNR

data was too restrictive. On the access to the documents related to the EU-US Agreement, he

will transmit the question to the relevant bodies of the Council. On the obligations for carriers

question, further language improvement is needed and the intention is to request carriers to

supply only information they already have. Standards of data protection should be fixed in

the text and be applicable to processing of data.

The Commission's representative explained why the proposal was only concerned with air

carriers flying in/out the EU. He announced that there will be a committee that will establish

common standards/criteria for retention of data. On the access to the documents related to the

EU-US Agreement, he invited the Committee to approach the Commission's vice-president

dealing with the matter.

Members of the Committee expressed concerns about the extension of the application of the

framework decision to other types of crimes and to other modes of transport. They also put

questions on the legal basis of the proposal and on the efficiency of the system proposed.

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 13 May 2008

  • f) 
    Draft wind-up resolution on the EP debates on Visa Waiver (EU/USA Troika meeting of 13 March 2008 and Plenary debate of 23 April 2008) LIBE/6/62156

­ Exchange of views and preparation of a draft wind-up resolution The chairman of the LIBE Committee, Mr. Deprez proposed a draft wind-up resolution on the

EP debates on Visa Waiver.

Several speakers agreed with the proposal and expressed their concerns about the two track

approach and the pressure Member States not included in the Visa Waiver program face today

from the US. They insisted on the necessity to clarify the future of this type of bilateral

agreements with the agreement negotiated by the Commission on behalf of the EU.

The Legal Service of the Parliament was requested to deliver an opinion on this issue. It will

submit its opinion next week, before Thursday.

Amendments to this proposal will be directly submitted to the chairman, who will prepare a

consolidated version for the next Strasbourg session in view of the meeting of the political

groups' coordinators.

Rapporteur: Claudio FAVA (PSE, IT)

­ Exchange of views

The rapporteur informed the Committee that a seminar on this issue will be organised in the

coming weeks and that the Council intends to adopt this proposal under the French

Presidency. According to him, Member States should be allowed to maintain provisions

which are more favourable than the directive. The term "employer" should be better defined

in order to include interim agencies. Attention should be paid to the risk of putting too much

responsibility on undertakings employing third-country nationals. He welcomed the proposal

contained in Article 14 and stressed the need to provide for effective mechanisms allowing

the denunciation of exploitation situations. He will meet the present and future Presidencies of

the Council on 7 May 2008 to discuss this proposal.

The Slovenian Presidency informed the Committee that Member States were in favour of the

proposal and presented the state of play of the dossier in the Council.

Members of the Committee commented the scope of application of the proposal, the

responsibility of different actors, the percentage of control required and stressed that

undertakings should not be subject to excessive constraints, since it is not their responsability

to fight illegal immigration.

The report will be submitted to the Committee in June 2008. Further exchanges of views on it

will take place in June, July and August 2008.

II. Consideration of reports as opinion-giving committee

  • a) 
    Joint debate on the following items, consideration of draft opinions: i) European Electronic Communications Market Authority 2007/0249(COD) COM(2007)0699 ­ C6-0428/2007

Draftsman: Alexander ALVARO (ALDE, DE)

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 26 May 2008

  • ii) 
    Electronic communications networks and services, protection of privacy and consumer protection

2007/0248(COD) COM(2007)0698 ­ C6-0420/2007

Draftsman: Alexander ALVARO (ALDE, DE)

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 13 May 2008 iii) Electronic communications networks and services

2007/0247(COD) COM(2007)0697 ­ C6-0427/2007

Draftsman: Syed KAMALL (EPP­ED, UK)

Timetable

Deadline for tabling amendments: 13 May 2008

The presentation of the draft opinions was followed by an exchange of views with the other

members of the Committee. The speakers namely addressed the following points:

· The possibility of putting the ENISA under the supervision of both DG JLS and

DG INFSO and the redefinition of its mandate;

· The issue of prior consent and of a free choice to submit or not data;

· The responsibility of the undertakings encrypting data;

· The respective role of the national regulatory authorities and of the Commission;

· The role of the LIBE Committee: should it focus on the respect of privacy aspect?

Concerning Mr Alvaro's second draft opinion, several speakers expressed doubts about the

insertion of the word "serious" in amendment 7, the articulation between amendments 16 and

17 and the compatibility of the definition of traffic data (amendment 12) with the 95/46/EC

Directive 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.

Mr Hustinx, the European Data Protection Supervisor, also commented Mr Alvaro's second

draft opinion. He informed the Committee that he submitted his opinion on the same

Commission proposal few weeks ago. He welcomed amendments 13 and 26 and fully

supported the second part of amendment 16. He disagreed with the insertion of the word

"serious" in amendment 7 on the ground that it adds uncertainty in practice and it would blur

the effects of the incentives to provide for security arrangements, which represent the most

important issue under discussion. Concerning amendments 4 and 12 (IP addresses), they do

not add anything new, but some issues were left out : he opposes them. He also noted that the

95/46/EC Directive definition is different from the one proposed by the draftsman.

The Commission's representative also expressed doubts on amendment 7 and proposed this

issue to be left for the future implementing rules of the directive. He also expressed doubts on

amendment 12. He drew the attention of the Committee on the impact of the entry into force

of the Lisbon Treaty on the deadlines for the adoption of the directive. He welcomed Mr

Kamall's proposal approach on the spectrum issue.

  • b) 
    Parliament's new role and responsibilities implementing the Treaty of Lisbon 2008/2063(INI)

Draftsman: Johannes VOGGENHUBER (Greens/ALE, AT)

­ Exchange of views

Mr Voggenhuber presented a preliminary opinion on the AFCO Committee report on this

issue. He stressed the need to insure the compatibility of prior acquis with the Charter of

Fundamental Rights and the scrutiny by the Parliament of the manner in which human rights

protection is insured. The Council might try to adopt important pieces of legislation before the

European Parliament receives more powers; in order to avoid this, the European Parliament

should already draft some opinions as "first reading" opinions. The rapporteur also insisted on

the necessity to develop political cooperation with national parliaments in a form different

from COSAC.

Different members of the Committee expressed concerns on the manner in which the

Parliament will be involved in the examination of the proposals on immigration that will

arrive in autumn 2008. For the PNR proposal, for instance, wouldn't it be wiser to wait till the

entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty? Other members rather insisted on the need to better

communicate with the Council in other to avoid any blockage. Speakers also addressed the

implications of the entry into force of the Treaty on the organisation of the Parliament: which

will be the Committee responsible for Human Rights issues? how the future volume of work

can be handled?

The draft opinion will be in principle presented during the 28-29 May meeting of the

Committee.

III. Presentation of the annual report of Eurojust

Mr José Luis LOPES a MOTA, President of the College of Eurojust, presented the Eurojust

annual report for 2007. He referred to the type of cases dealt with and the cooperation with

third countries. He also announced that the administrative resources of Eurojust have

increased and hoped that cooperation with Europol and OLAF would improve.

Members of the Committees put Mr Lopes a Mota questions on the risks of the data

exchanges between Eurojust and third countries, the joint investigations teams, the

information sources of Eurojust, the future of Eurojust in the perspective of the creation of the

European Public Prosecutor.

Mr Lopes a Mota informed the Committee that it was the first time that a discussion on the

protection of exchange of information and on the need to have a secure system for exchange

occurred in the EU. Concerning exchange of information with the US, it passes by Member

States and it is not directly insured by Eurojust. On the question of cooperation with Russia,

he informed them that Russia was in the process of ratifying the Council of Europe

convention on the protection of data. According to him, Eurojust has started reflecting on the

perspective of being used as a basis for the future European Public Prosecutor Office.

IV. Votes

  • a) 
    Concentration and pluralism in the media in the European Union 2007/2253(INI) SEC(2007)0032

Draftsman: Luis HERRERO-TEJEDOR (EPP­ED, ES)

A draft opinion, with several amendments, was adopted with a large majority.

Draftsman: Philip BRADBOURN (EPP­ED, UK)

A draft opinion, with several amendments, was adopted unanimously.

  • c) 
    Contact-point network against corruption 2007/0809(CNS) 11231/2007 ­ C6-0240/2007

Rapporteur: Hubert PIRKER (EPP­ED, AT)

A draft report, with several amendments, was adopted with a large majority.

V. Other business th

· Before the discussion on the different items of the agenda on 5 of May, several members of the Committee commented Commissioner Frattini's oral interventions

during the recent Italian electoral campaign.

· Mrs Martine ROURE (PSE, FR) presented, on behalf of Mrs Dührkop Dührkop, the

budget priorities for 2009, followed by an exchange of views with the members of the

Committee. She namely focused on the preparation of the entry into force of the

Lisbon Treaty, on the necessity for providing FRONTEX with adequate tools, for

CEPOL and other agencies to comply with the Financial Regulation. In her own name,

she asked the Commission whether it was possible to finance the UNHCHR office in

Brussels.

· The Legal Service of the Parliament informed the Committee on the ECJ judgment of

6 May 2008 in case C-133/06, Parliament / Council. The ECJ has partially annulled

the directive on procedures for granting and withdrawing refugee status, on the ground

that the Council exceeded the powers conferred on it by the Treaty by including

secondary legal basis in the directive.

VI. Date and place of next meeting

Monday 19 May, in Strasbourg

2.

Originele weergave

afbeelding document
 
 

3.

Meer informatie