AMENDMENT - European Parliament
←
→
Transcription du contenu de la page
Si votre navigateur ne rend pas la page correctement, lisez s'il vous plaît le contenu de la page ci-dessous
European Parliament
2014-2019
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs
2017/2131(INL)
17.5.2018
AMENDMENT
1 - 67
Draft report
Judith Sargentini
(PE620.837v01-00)
on a proposal calling on the Council to determine, pursuant to Article 7(1) of
the Treaty on European Union, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach
by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded
(2017/2131(INL))
AM\1153493XM.docx PE622.145v01-00
XM United in diversity XMAM_Com_NonLegReport
PE622.145v01-00 2/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMAmendment 1
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to the to Articles 3,
4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12,13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21,
22, 23, 24, 35, 41, 47 of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European
Union,
Or. en
Amendment 2
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to the European
Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
(ECHR),
Or. en
Amendment 3
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 c (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by
the UN General Assembly in 1948,
Or. en
AM\1153493XM.docx 3/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMAmendment 4
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 d (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child,
adopted in New York on 20 November
1989,
Or. en
Amendment 5
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 e (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to the Council of
Europe Convention on preventing and
combating violence against women and
domestic violence (Istanbul Convention),
and to the Council Decisions(EU)
2017/865 and (EU) 2017/866 of 11 May
2017 on the signing, on behalf of the
European Union, of the Council of
Europe Convention on preventing and
combating violence against women and
domestic violence,
Or. en
Amendment 6
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 f (new)
PE622.145v01-00 4/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMMotion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to the signing of the
Council of Europe Convention on
preventing and combating violence
against women and domestic violence
(Istanbul Convention) by Hungary on 14
March 2011,
Or. en
Amendment 7
Heinz K. Becker, Cecilia Wikström, Michał Boni, Juan Fernando López Aguilar
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to its resolution of
29.May.2017 on combating anti-Semitism
(2017 / 2692 (RSP)),
Or. en
Amendment 8
Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6
Motion for a resolution Amendment
— having regard to its resolution of deleted
25 October 2016 with recommendations to
the Commission on the establishment of
an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule
of law and fundamental rights7 ,
__________________
7
Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0409.
Or. en
AM\1153493XM.docx 5/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMAmendment 9
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to OLAF annual
2016 report,
Or. en
Amendment 10
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 b (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
- having regard to FRA annual
reports of 2016 and 2017,
Or. en
Amendment 11
Marie-Christine Vergiat
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Motion for a resolution Amendment
A. considérant que l’Union est fondée A. considérant que l’Union est fondée
sur les valeurs de respect de la dignité sur le respect du socle des valeurs définies
humaine, de liberté, de démocratie, notamment par la Charte européenne des
d’égalité, de l’état de droit, ainsi que de droits fondamentaux, la Convention
respect des droits de l’homme, y compris européenne des droits de l'Homme1a, la
des droits des personnes appartenant à des Charte sociale européenne, la Déclaration
minorités, ainsi que l’indique l’article 2 du universelle des droits de l'Homme, et les
traité sur l’Union européenne (traité UE), deux pactes de New-York affirmant le
et que ces valeurs, qui sont communes aux respect de la dignité humaine, de liberté, de
PE622.145v01-00 6/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMÉtats membres, constituent la base des démocratie, d’égalité, de l’état de droit,
droits dont jouissent les personnes qui ainsi que de respect des droits de
vivent dans l’Union; l’Homme, y compris des droits des
personnes appartenant à des minorités,
ainsi que l’indique aussi l’article 2 du traité
sur l’Union européenne (traité UE), qui
sont communes aux États membres,
constituent la base des droits dont jouissent
les personnes qui vivent dans l’Union;
__________________
1a
Amendement formel : remplacer
"droits de l'homme" par "droits de
l'Homme" dans tout le texte
Or. fr
Amendment 12
Louis Michel, Gérard Deprez, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Cecilia Wikström,
Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Petr Ježek, Morten Helveg Petersen, Angelika Mlinar
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Motion for a resolution Amendment
A. considérant que l’Union est fondée A. considérant que l’Union est fondée
sur les valeurs de respect de la dignité sur les valeurs de respect de la dignité
humaine, de liberté, de démocratie, humaine, de liberté, de démocratie,
d’égalité, de l’état de droit, ainsi que de d’égalité, de l’état de droit, ainsi que de
respect des droits de l’homme, y compris respect des droits de l’homme, y compris
des droits des personnes appartenant à des des droits des personnes appartenant à des
minorités, ainsi que l’indique l’article 2 du minorités, ainsi que l’indique l’article 2 du
traité sur l’Union européenne (traité UE), traité sur l’Union européenne (traité UE),
et que ces valeurs, qui sont communes aux et que ces valeurs, qui sont communes aux
États membres, constituent la base des États membres et auxquelles tous les Etats
droits dont jouissent les personnes qui membres ont librement souscrit,
vivent dans l’Union; constituent la base des droits dont jouissent
les personnes qui vivent dans l’Union;
Or. fr
Amendment 13
Louis Michel, Gérard Deprez, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Cecilia Wikström,
Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Petr Ježek, Morten Helveg Petersen, Angelika Mlinar
AM\1153493XM.docx 7/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMMotion for a resolution
Recital B
Motion for a resolution Amendment
B. considérant qu’un risque clair de B. considérant qu’un risque clair de
violation grave par un État membre des violation grave par un État membre des
valeurs consacrées à l’article 2 du traité UE valeurs consacrées à l’article 2 du traité UE
ne concerne pas uniquement l’État membre ne concerne pas uniquement l’État membre
dans lequel le risque se réalise, mais qu’il a dans lequel le risque se réalise, mais qu’il a
une incidence sur la nature même de une incidence sur les autres Etats
l’Union et sur les droits de ses citoyens; membres, sur la confiance mutuelle entre
eux, sur la nature même de l’Union et sur
les droits de ses citoyens;
Or. fr
Amendment 14
Marie-Christine Vergiat
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Motion for a resolution Amendment
B. considérant qu’un risque clair de B. considérant qu’un risque clair de
violation grave par un État membre des violation grave par un État membre des
valeurs consacrées à l’article 2 du traité UE valeurs consacrées à l’article 2 du traité UE
ne concerne pas uniquement l’État membre ne concerne pas uniquement l’État membre
dans lequel le risque se réalise, mais qu’il a dans lequel le risque se réalise, mais qu’il a
une incidence sur la nature même de une incidence sur la nature même de
l’Union et sur les droits de ses citoyens; l’Union et sur les droits des citoyens et de
tous ceux qui sont présents sur son
territoire;
Or. fr
Amendment 15
Ana Gomes
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
PE622.145v01-00 8/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMMotion for a resolution Amendment
B a. whereas the declining respect for
fundamental freedoms in Hungary, since
2010, includes appropriations of state and
of non-state media by the ruling Fidezs
party and deliberate diffusion of hate and
xenophobic propaganda , namely aimed
at negatively influencing public opinion
towards refugees, asylum seekers and
migrants; includes also growing political
interference in the independence of the
judiciary and efforts to restrain non-
governmental organisations' actions in
Hungary, as well as the integrity of the
constitutional system; and includes
pervasive corruption, conflicts of interests
and corruption-like practices linked to
members of the government; whereas the
situation in Hungary demands concerted
action from the European Union, namely
in the condemnation of these breaches of
fundamental freedoms and citizens'
rights, and corresponding sanctions
suspending structural funds to Hungary
while these breaches persist;
Or. en
Amendment 16
Louis Michel, Gérard Deprez, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Cecilia Wikström,
Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Petr Ježek, Morten Helveg Petersen, Angelika Mlinar
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
B bis. considérant que l’article 7 par. 1
TUE constitue une phase préventive
dotant l’Union de la capacité d’intervenir
en cas de risque clair de violation grave
des valeurs communes; que cette action
préventive prévoit un dialogue avec l’État
membre concerné et a pour objectif
d’éviter d’éventuelles sanctions ;
AM\1153493XM.docx 9/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMOr. fr
Amendment 17
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Motion for a resolution Amendment
C. whereas the scope of Article 7 deleted
TEU is not limited to the areas covered by
Union law and whereas the Union can
assess the existence of a clear risk of a
serious breach of the common values in
areas falling under Member States’
competences;
Or. en
Amendment 18
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
C a. whereas according to Article 5 (2)
TEU, under the principle of conferral, the
Union shall act only within the limits of
the competences conferred upon it by the
Member States in the Treaties to attain
the objectives set out therein.
Competences not conferred upon the
Union in the Treaties remain with the
Member States. Article 2 TEU does not
confer any material competence upon the
union, hence Article 7 TEU only applies
to cases when Member States act within
the limits of competences conferred on the
Union in the treaties. ;
Or. en
PE622.145v01-00 10/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMAmendment 19
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
C b. whereas respect of the content of
Article 2 TEU by Member States cannot
be, under the Treaties, the subject-matter
of an action by the institutions of the
Union without the existence of a specific
material competence;
Or. en
Amendment 20
Ana Gomes
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Motion for a resolution Amendment
D. whereas despite repeated calls from D. whereas despite repeated calls from
Parliament on the Hungarian authorities to Parliament on the Hungarian authorities to
take the necessary measures to ensure that take the necessary measures to ensure that
Union values are fully respected in Union values are fully respected in
Hungary, the situation has not been Hungary, the situation has not been
addressed and many concerns remain; addressed and many concerns remain;
whereas the Hungarian authorities'
disregard for fundamental freedoms, rule
of law and liberal democratic values has
led to a systemic threat to the rule of law
and democracy, impacting the image and
the overall cohesiveness of the Union, as
well as its effectiveness and credibility in
the defence of fundamental rights, human
rights and democracy globally;
Or. en
AM\1153493XM.docx 11/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMAmendment 21
Kinga Gál, Traian Ungureanu
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Motion for a resolution Amendment
D. whereas despite repeated calls D. whereas Hungary has always been
from Parliament on the Hungarian ready for dialogue at all levels to discuss
authorities to take the necessary measures the legality of any specific measure and
to ensure that Union values are fully respond to any concern;
respected in Hungary, the situation has
not been addressed and many concerns
remain;
Or. en
Amendment 22
Heinz K. Becker, Cecilia Wikström, Juan Fernando López Aguilar
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(11 a) the need to consistently combat
anti-Semitism and prosecute anti-Semitic
statements and hateful statements against
Jews
Or. en
Amendment 23
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(12 a) Protection of the acquired rights;
Or. en
PE622.145v01-00 12/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMAmendment 24
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point 12 b (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(12 b) The functioning of the new
electoral law;
Or. en
Amendment 25
Kinga Gál, Traian Ungureanu
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Motion for a resolution Amendment
2. Believes that the facts and trends 2. Believes that the facts and trends
mentioned in the Annex to this resolution mentioned in the Annex to this resolution
taken together represent a systemic threat are specific policy issues, the majority of
to democracy, the rule of law and which have either already been
fundamental rights in Hungary and satisfactorily concluded or are currently
constitute a clear risk of a serious breach of being discussed in the course of regular
the values of Article 2 TEU; dialogues between Hungarian authorities
and relevant EU or international bodies.
These specific individual concerns are
unrelated to the fulfilment of fundamental
European values and the principles of
rule of law and thus fall short of
representing a systemic threat to
democracy, the rule of law and
fundamental rights in Hungary and by no
means constitute a clear risk of a serious
breach of the values of Article 2 TEU;
Or. en
Amendment 26
Nadine Morano
AM\1153493XM.docx 13/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMMotion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Motion for a resolution Amendment
2. estime que les faits et les tendances 2. estime que les faits et les tendances
exposés dans l’annexe à la présente exposés dans l’annexe à la présente
résolution représentent ensemble une résolution constituent un risque clair de
menace systémique pour la démocratie, violation des valeurs inscrites à l’article 2
l’état de droit et les droits fondamentaux du traité UE;
en Hongrie et constituent un risque clair de
violation grave des valeurs inscrites à
l’article 2 du traité UE;
Or. fr
Amendment 27
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Motion for a resolution Amendment
2. Believes that the facts and trends 2. Believes that the facts and trends
mentioned in the Annex to this resolution mentioned in the Annex to this resolution
taken together represent a systemic threat taken together do not represent a systemic
to democracy, the rule of law and threat to democracy, the rule of law and
fundamental rights in Hungary and fundamental rights in Hungary and do not
constitute a clear risk of a serious breach of constitute a clear risk of a serious breach of
the values of Article 2 TEU; the values of Article 2 TEU;
Or. en
Amendment 28
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
2 a. Notes the outcome of the
parliamentary elections in Hungary,
PE622.145v01-00 14/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMwhich took place on the 8th April 2018,
which ensured the re-election of the
previous ruling party - Fidesz, however
highlights the fact that the new electoral
law, introducing the system of single-
member constituencies, was implemented
in order to favour of the governing party.
The new system is undermining the ability
of candidates to compete on an equal
basis.
Or. en
Amendment 29
Jörg Meuthen
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Motion for a resolution Amendment
3. übermittelt dem Rat aus diesem entfällt
Grund und im Einklang mit Artikel 7
Absatz 1 EUV diesen begründeten
Vorschlag und fordert ihn auf,
festzustellen, dass die eindeutige Gefahr
einer schwerwiegenden Verletzung der in
Artikel 2 EUV genannten Werte durch
Ungarn besteht, und diesbezüglich
geeignete Empfehlungen an Ungarn zu
richten;
Or. de
Amendment 30
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Motion for a resolution Amendment
3. Submits, therefore, in accordance 3. Submits, therefore, in accordance
with Article 7(1) TEU, this reasoned with Article 7(1) TEU, this reasoned
proposal to the Council, inviting the proposal to the Council, inviting the
AM\1153493XM.docx 15/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMCouncil to determine that there is a clear Council to determine that there is no clear
risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the
values referred to in Article 2 TEU and to values referred to in Article 2 TEU;
address appropriate recommendations to
Hungary in this regard;
Or. en
Amendment 31
Kinga Gál, Traian Ungureanu
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Motion for a resolution Amendment
3. Submits, therefore, in accordance 3. Submits, therefore, in accordance
with Article 7(1) TEU, this reasoned with Article 7(1) TEU, this reasoned
proposal to the Council, inviting the proposal to the Council, inviting the
Council to determine that there is a clear Council to determine that there is no clear
risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the
values referred to in Article 2 TEU and to values referred to in Article 2 TEU;
address appropriate recommendations to
Hungary in this regard;
Or. en
Amendment 32
Nadine Morano
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Motion for a resolution Amendment
3. soumet par conséquent, 3. soumet par conséquent,
conformément à l’article 7, paragraphe 1, conformément à l’article 7, paragraphe 1,
du traité UE, la présente proposition du traité UE, la présente proposition
motivée au Conseil, invitant le Conseil à motivée au Conseil, invitant le Conseil à
constater qu’il existe un risque clair de constater qu’il existe un risque clair de
violation grave, par la Hongrie, des valeurs violation, par la Hongrie, des valeurs
visées à l’article 2 du traité UE et à visées à l’article 2 du traité UE et à
adresser à la Hongrie des recommandations adresser à la Hongrie des recommandations
appropriées à cet égard; appropriées à cet égard;
PE622.145v01-00 16/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMOr. fr
Amendment 33
Jörg Meuthen
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Motion for a resolution Amendment
4. beauftragt seinen Präsidenten, diese 4. beauftragt seinen Präsidenten, diese
Entschließung und den in der Anlage Entschließung und den in der Anlage
enthaltenen begründeten Vorschlag für enthaltenen begründeten Vorschlag für
einen Beschluss des Rates der Kommission einen Beschluss des Rates der Kommission
und dem Rat sowie den Regierungen und und dem Rat sowie den Regierungen und
Parlamenten der Mitgliedstaaten zu Parlamenten der Mitgliedstaaten nicht zu
übermitteln. übermitteln.
Or. de
Amendment 34
Louis Michel, Gérard Deprez, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Cecilia Wikström,
Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Petr Ježek, Morten Helveg Petersen, Angelika Mlinar
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 1 a (new)
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(1 bis) Selon l’article 49 du TUE,
l’adhésion à l’Union requiert le respect
ainsi que la promotion des valeurs visées
à l’article 2. L’adhésion de la Hongrie
était une démarche volontaire relevant de
la souveraineté nationale et qui reflétait
un large consensus sur tout le spectre
politique hongrois.
Or. fr
Amendment 35
Kinga Gál, Traian Ungureanu
AM\1153493XM.docx 17/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMMotion for a resolution
Annex I – point 3
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(3) The European Parliament also deleted
noted that the Hungarian authorities have
repeatedly failed to take the actions
recommended in its previous resolutions.
Or. en
Amendment 36
Louis Michel, Gérard Deprez, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Cecilia Wikström,
Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Petr Ježek, Morten Helveg Petersen, Angelika Mlinar
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 4
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(4) Dans sa résolution du 17 mai 2017 (4) Dans sa résolution du 17 mai 2017
sur la situation en Hongrie, le Parlement sur la situation en Hongrie, le Parlement
européen a déclaré que la situation actuelle européen a déclaré que la situation actuelle
en Hongrie représentait un risque clair de en Hongrie représentait un risque clair de
violation grave des valeurs visées à violation grave des valeurs visées à
l’article 2 du traité UE; l’article 2 du traité UE et qu'elle justifiait
le lancement de la procédure prévue à
l'article 7, paragraphe 1 du TUE;
Or. fr
Amendment 37
Louis Michel, Gérard Deprez, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Cecilia Wikström,
Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Petr Ježek, Morten Helveg Petersen, Angelika Mlinar
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 5
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(5) Toute une série d’acteurs à (5) Dans sa communication de 2003
l’échelon national, européen et sur l’article 7 du Traité sur l’Union
international n’ont cessé de faire part de européenne 1 a, la Commission
leur profonde préoccupation à l’égard de la européenne nomme les rapports des
PE622.145v01-00 18/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMsituation de la démocratie, de l’état de droit organisations internationales et des ONG
et des droits fondamentaux en Hongrie, comme sources d’informations permettant
dont les institutions et organes de l’Union, le suivi du respect des valeurs communes.
le Conseil de l’Europe, l’Organisation La Commission cite à cet égard la
pour la sécurité et la coopération en commission des droits de l’Homme des
Europe (OSCE), les Nations unies ainsi Nations unies, le Commissaire aux droits
que de nombreuses organisations de la de l’Homme du Conseil de l’Europe,
société civile. l’OSCE ainsi que les ONG Amnesty
International, Human Right Watch et la
Fédération Internationale des Droits de
l’Homme. Ces organes et ONG mais
également les institutions et organes de
l’Union figurent parmi les acteurs à
l’échelon national, européen et
international qui n’ont cessé de faire part
de leur profonde préoccupation à l’égard
de la situation de la démocratie, de l’état de
droit et des droits fondamentaux en
Hongrie.
__________________
1a
COM(2003) 606
Or. fr
Amendment 38
Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 5
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(5) A wide range of actors at the (5) A wide range of actors at the
national, European and international level, national, European and international level,
have repeatedly expressed their deep have repeatedly expressed their deep
concerns about the situation of democracy, concerns about the situation of democracy,
the rule of law and fundamental rights in the rule of law and fundamental rights in
Hungary, including the institutions and Hungary, the Council of Europe, the
bodies of the Union, the Council of Organisation for Security and Co-operation
Europe, the Organisation for Security and in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations
Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), the (UN), as well as numerous civil society
United Nations (UN), as well as numerous organisations, but these are to be
civil society organisations. considered legally non-binding opinions,
since only the Court of Justice of the
European Union may interpret the
provisions of the Treaties.
AM\1153493XM.docx 19/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMOr. en
Amendment 39
Nadine Morano
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 5
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(5) Toute une série d’acteurs à (5) Toute une série d’acteurs à
l’échelon national, européen et l’échelon national, européen et
international n’ont cessé de faire part de international ont fait part de leur profonde
leur profonde préoccupation à l’égard de la préoccupation à l’égard de la situation de la
situation de la démocratie, de l’état de droit démocratie, de l’état de droit et des droits
et des droits fondamentaux en Hongrie, fondamentaux en Hongrie, dont les
dont les institutions et organes de l’Union, institutions et organes de l’Union, le
le Conseil de l’Europe, l’Organisation pour Conseil de l’Europe, l’Organisation pour la
la sécurité et la coopération en Europe sécurité et la coopération en Europe
(OSCE), les Nations unies ainsi que de (OSCE), les Nations unies ainsi que de
nombreuses organisations de la société nombreuses organisations de la société
civile. civile.
Or. fr
Amendment 40
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 6
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(6) Since its adoption and entry into deleted
force in January 2012, the Constitution of
Hungary (the “Fundamental Law”) has
been amended six times. The Venice
Commission expressed its concerns
regarding the constitution-making process
in Hungary on several occasions, both as
regards the Fundamental Law and
amendments thereto. The criticism
focused on the lack of transparency of the
process, the inadequate involvement of
civil society, the absence of sincere
PE622.145v01-00 20/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMconsultation, the endangerment of the
separation of powers and the weakening
of the national system of checks and
balances.
Or. en
Amendment 41
Josef Weidenholzer, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Tanja
Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu
Kyenge, Sylvie Guillaume
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 6
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(6) Since its adoption and entry into (6) Since its adoption and entry into
force in January 2012, the Constitution of force in January 2012, the Constitution of
Hungary (the “Fundamental Law”) has Hungary (the “Fundamental Law”) has
been amended six times. The Venice been amended six times - having regard to
Commission expressed its concerns the Fundamental Law of Hungary,
regarding the constitution-making process adopted on 18 April 2011 by the National
in Hungary on several occasions, both as Assembly of the Hungarian Republic,
regards the Fundamental Law and which entered into force on 1 January
amendments thereto. The criticism focused 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
on the lack of transparency of the process, Fundamental Law’), the Transitional
the inadequate involvement of civil Provisions of the Fundamental Law of
society, the absence of sincere Hungary, adopted on 30 December 2011
consultation, the endangerment of the by the National Assembly, which also
separation of powers and the weakening of entered into force on 1 January 2012
the national system of checks and balances. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
Transitional Provisions’), the First
Amendment to the Fundamental Law,
tabled by the Minister for National
Economy on 17 April 2012 and adopted
by the Hungarian Parliament on 4 June
2012, establishing that the Transitional
Provisions are part of the Fundamental
Law, to the Second Amendment to the
Fundamental Law, tabled on 18
September 2012 in the form of an
individual member's bill and adopted by
the Hungarian Parliament on 29 October
2012, introducing the requirement of
voter registration into the Transitional
Provisions, the Third Amendment to the
AM\1153493XM.docx 21/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMFundamental Law, tabled on 7December
2012, adopted by the Hungarian
Parliament on 21 December 2012 and
establishing that the limits and conditions
for acquisition of ownership and for use
of arable land and forests and the rules
concerning the organisation of integrated
agricultural production are to be laid
down by cardinal law, the Fourth
Amendment of the Fundamental Law,
tabled on 8 February 2013 in the form of
an individual member's bill and adopted
by the Hungarian Parliament on 11
March 2013, which, among other
provisions, integrates into the text of the
Fundamental Law the Transitional
Provisions (with some exceptions
including the provision requiring voter
registration) annulled by the
Constitutional Court of Hungary on 28
December 2012 on procedural grounds
(Decision No 45/2012), and remaining
provisions of a genuinely transitional
nature in this document. The Venice
Commission expressed its concerns
regarding the constitution-making process
in Hungary on several occasions, both as
regards the Fundamental Law and
amendments thereto. The criticism focused
on the lack of transparency of the process,
the inadequate involvement of civil
society, the absence of sincere
consultation, the endangerment of the
separation of powers and the weakening of
the national system of checks and balances.
Or. en
Amendment 42
Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 6
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(6) Since its adoption and entry into (6) Since its adoption and entry into
PE622.145v01-00 22/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMforce in January 2012, the Constitution of force in January 2012, the Constitution of
Hungary (the “Fundamental Law”) has Hungary (the “Fundamental Law”) has
been amended six times. The Venice been amended six times, predominantly
Commission expressed its concerns following the suggestions of the Venice
regarding the constitution-making process Commission and the European
in Hungary on several occasions, both as Commission.. The Venice Commission
regards the Fundamental Law and expressed its concerns regarding the
amendments thereto. The criticism focused constitution-making process in Hungary on
on the lack of transparency of the process, several occasions, both as regards the
the inadequate involvement of civil Fundamental Law and amendments
society, the absence of sincere thereto. The Venice Commission
consultation, the endangerment of the welcomed in its opinion that the
separation of powers and the weakening of Fundamental Law establishes a
the national system of checks and balances. constitutional order based on democracy,
the rule of law and the protection of
fundamental rights as underlying
principles, as well as acknowledged the
efforts to establish a constitutional order
in line with the common European
democratic values and standards, and to
regulate fundamental rights and freedoms
in compliance with binding international
instruments, including the European
Convention on Human Rights and the EU
Charter of Fundamental Rights. The
criticism focused on the lack of
transparency of the process, the inadequate
involvement of civil society, the absence of
sincere consultation, the endangerment of
the separation of powers and the
weakening of the national system of checks
and balances, despite the fact that an ad
hoc parliamentary committee of 45
members, representing all parliamentary
parties was established for the necessary
political debate concerning the
Fundamental Law, and a national
consultative body was also set up in
January 2011, followed by a large scale
public survey on the draft based on a
questionnaire of 12 questions.
Furthermore, several public debates were
organized on the values and aims of the
Fundamental Law, with the involvement
of universities, churches and the civil
society, as a result of which almost a
million citizens expressed their opinion on
the draft constitution.
AM\1153493XM.docx 23/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMOr. en
Amendment 43
Nadine Morano
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 6
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(6) Depuis son adoption et son entrée (6) Depuis son adoption et son entrée
en vigueur en janvier 2012, la Constitution en vigueur en janvier 2012, la Constitution
hongroise (dénommée «Loi hongroise (dénommée «Loi
fondamentale») a été modifiée à six fondamentale») a été modifiée à six
reprises. La Commission de Venise a fait reprises, ce qui relève pleinement de la
part à plusieurs reprises de ses souveraineté de la Hongrie. La
préoccupations à l’égard du processus Commission de Venise a fait part à
constituant en Hongrie, tant en ce qui plusieurs reprises de ses préoccupations à
concerne la Loi fondamentale que les l’égard du processus constituant en
modifications qui y ont été apportées. Ses Hongrie, tant en ce qui concerne la Loi
critiques portaient sur le manque de fondamentale que les modifications qui y
transparence du processus, le fait que la ont été apportées. Ses critiques portaient
société civile y ait été insuffisamment sur le manque de transparence du
associée, l’absence de consultation sincère, processus, le fait que la société civile y ait
la mise en danger de la séparation des été insuffisamment associée, l’absence de
pouvoirs et l’affaiblissement du système consultation sincère, la mise en danger de
national de contre-pouvoirs. la séparation des pouvoirs et
l’affaiblissement du système national de
contre-pouvoirs.
Or. fr
Amendment 44
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 7
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(7) The competences of the deleted
Hungarian Constitutional Court were
restricted as a result of the constitutional
reform, including with regard to
budgetary matters, the abolition of the
PE622.145v01-00 24/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMactio popularis, the possibility for the
Court to refer to its case law prior to 1
January 2012 and the limitation on the
Court’s ability to review the
constitutionality of any changes to the
Fundamental Law apart from those of a
procedural nature only. The Venice
Commission expressed serious concerns
about those limitations and about the
procedure for the appointment of judges,
and made recommendations to the
Hungarian authorities to ensure the
necessary checks and balances in its
Opinion on Act CLI of 2011 on the
Constitutional Court of Hungary adopted
on 19 June 2012 and in its Opinion on the
Fourth Amendment to the Fundamental
Law of Hungary adopted on 17 June
2013.
Or. en
Amendment 45
Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 7
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(7) The competences of the Hungarian (7) The competences of the Hungarian
Constitutional Court were restricted as a Constitutional Court were preserved and
result of the constitutional reform, broadened as a result of the constitutional
including with regard to budgetary reform, especially in terms of the scope of
matters, the abolition of the actio the right to initiate ex ante legality review
popularis, the possibility for the Court to of legislative drafts and by reinforcing its
refer to its case law prior to 1 January competence and gaining practical
2012 and the limitation on the Court’s competences for ex post legality review.
ability to review the constitutionality of The abolition of the actio popularis was
any changes to the Fundamental Law explicitly requested by the Constitutional
apart from those of a procedural nature Court of Hungary itself and limitations
only. The Venice Commission expressed regarding the review of constitutional
serious concerns about those limitations amendments is also in line with the
and about the procedure for the position of the Constitutional Court which
appointment of judges, and made explicitly confirmed in its case-law that
recommendations to the Hungarian the Court had no competence to review
authorities to ensure the necessary checks the substance of such amendments, as it is
AM\1153493XM.docx 25/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMand balances in its Opinion on Act CLI of itself subordinate to the constitution and
2011 on the Constitutional Court of cannot review the constitution. In its
Hungary adopted on 19 June 2012 and in Opinions the Venice Commission also
its Opinion on the Fourth Amendment to identified a number of positive elements
the Fundamental Law of Hungary of the reforms, such as provisions on
adopted on 17 June 2013. budgetary guarantees, the fact that the
Hungarian authorities have taken up the
Commission’s suggestion to rule out the
re-election of Constitutional Court
Judges; it appreciated that the Act
provides for a time limit for the
appointment of new judges in order to
ensure continuity, functional immunity of
the judges, as well as that there is a
provision on the extension of the mandate
of the incumbent member in case the
Parliament fails to elect a new member to
the Constitutional Court within the time-
limit. Rules on the ex post review of legal
acts were warmly welcomed by the Venice
Commission. Provisions on access to the
Constitutional Court out of time in
exceptional circumstances were also
considered as positive elements. Although
no statutory changes were made following
the opinion of the Venice Commission on
the possibility for the Constitutional Court
to refer back to its case law, the
Hungarian Constitutional Court, in a
decision taken in 2013, stated that it was
possible to refer back to the substance of
its case law created under the former
constitution and has indeed done so in a
number of its recent decisions.
Or. en
Amendment 46
Lívia Járóka
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 7
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(7) The competences of the (7) The Venice Commission expressed
Hungarian Constitutional Court were serious concerns about the procedure for
PE622.145v01-00 26/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMrestricted as a result of the constitutional the appointment of judges, and made
reform, including with regard to recommendations to the Hungarian
budgetary matters, the abolition of the authorities to ensure the necessary checks
actio popularis, the possibility for the and balances in its Opinion on Act CLI of
Court to refer to its case law prior to 1 2011 on the Constitutional Court of
January 2012 and the limitation on the Hungary adopted on 19 June 2012 and in
Court’s ability to review the its Opinion on the Fourth Amendment to
constitutionality of any changes to the the Fundamental Law of Hungary adopted
Fundamental Law apart from those of a on 17 June 2013, whereas the new rules
procedural nature only. The Venice on the composition of the Constitutional
Commission expressed serious concerns Court (election based on qualified
about those limitations and about the majority and high level professional
procedure for the appointment of judges, requirements) are high level guarantees
and made recommendations to the of the independence of judges, as it does
Hungarian authorities to ensure the the reduction of the length of appointment
necessary checks and balances in its from 12 to 9 years and the exclusion of
Opinion on Act CLI of 2011 on the their reappointment.
Constitutional Court of Hungary adopted
on 19 June 2012 and in its Opinion on the
Fourth Amendment to the Fundamental
Law of Hungary adopted on 17 June 2013.
Or. en
Amendment 47
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 8
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(8) In the concluding observations of deleted
5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights
Committee expressed concerns that the
current constitutional complaint
procedure affords more limited access to
the Constitutional Court, does not provide
for a time limit for the exercise of
constitutional review and does not have a
suspensive effect on challenged
legislation. It also mentioned that the
provisions of the new Constitutional
Court Act weaken the security of tenure of
judges and increase the influence of the
government over the composition and
operation of the Constitutional Court by
AM\1153493XM.docx 27/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMchanging the judicial appointments
procedure, the number of judges in the
Court and their retirement age. The
Committee was also concerned about the
limitation of the Constitutional Court’s
competence and powers to review
legislation impinging on budgetary
matters.
Or. en
Amendment 48
Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 8
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(8) In the concluding observations of 5 (8) In the concluding observations of 5
April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights
Committee expressed concerns that the Committee expressed concerns that the
current constitutional complaint procedure current constitutional complaint procedure
affords more limited access to the affords more limited access to the
Constitutional Court, does not provide for a Constitutional Court, does not provide for a
time limit for the exercise of constitutional time limit for the exercise of constitutional
review and does not have a suspensive review and does not have a suspensive
effect on challenged legislation. It also effect on challenged legislation. In reality
mentioned that the provisions of the new however, following the abolishment of the
Constitutional Court Act weaken the actio popularis in line with the explicit
security of tenure of judges and increase request of Constitutional Court of
the influence of the government over the Hungary, the introduction of a truly
composition and operation of the effective constitutional complaint has
Constitutional Court by changing the considerably increased the competences
judicial appointments procedure, the of the Constitutional Court, since it can
number of judges in the Court and their exercise constitutional control over the
retirement age. The Committee was also whole of the judiciary and is able to annul
concerned about the limitation of the any court judgment in the case of its
Constitutional Court’s competence and unconstitutionality.
powers to review legislation impinging on
budgetary matters.
Or. en
PE622.145v01-00 28/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMAmendment 49
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 9
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(9) In its statement adopted on 9 April deleted
2018, the limited election observation
mission of the OSCE Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights concluded that the 2018
parliamentary elections were
characterised by a pervasive overlap
between state and ruling party resources,
undermining the ability of candidates to
compete on an equal basis. Voters had a
wide range of political options but
intimidating and xenophobic rhetoric,
media bias and opaque campaign
financing constricted the space for
genuine political debate, hindering the
ability of voters to make a fully informed
choice. It also expressed concerns about
the delineation of single-member
constituencies. Similar concerns were
expressed in the Joint Opinion of 18 June
2012 on the Act on the Elections of
Members of Parliament of Hungary
adopted by the Venice Commission and
the Council for Democratic Elections.
Or. en
Amendment 50
Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 9
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(9) In its statement adopted on 9 April (9) In its statement adopted on 9 April
2018, the limited election observation 2018, the limited election observation
mission of the OSCE Office for mission of the OSCE Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
AM\1153493XM.docx 29/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMconcluded that the 2018 parliamentary stated that the 2018 parliamentary elections
elections were characterised by a pervasive were characterised by a pervasive overlap
overlap between state and ruling party between state and ruling party resources,
resources, undermining the ability of undermining the ability of candidates to
candidates to compete on an equal basis. compete on an equal basis. Voters had a
Voters had a wide range of political wide range of political options but
options but intimidating and xenophobic intimidating and xenophobic rhetoric,
rhetoric, media bias and opaque campaign media bias and opaque campaign financing
financing constricted the space for genuine constricted the space for genuine political
political debate, hindering the ability of debate, hindering the ability of voters to
voters to make a fully informed choice. It make a fully informed choice. However,
also expressed concerns about the on the other hand, the preliminary
delineation of single-member findings and conclusions of the OSCE
constituencies. Similar concerns were also noted within the context of the 2018
expressed in the Joint Opinion of 18 June Hungarian parliamentary elections that
2012 on the Act on the Elections of fundamental rights and freedoms were
Members of Parliament of Hungary respected overall, the campaign was
adopted by the Venice Commission and the animated, media coverage was extensive,
Council for Democratic Elections. voters had a wide range of political
options, the public broadcaster fulfilled its
mandate to provide free airtime to
contestants, online media provided a
platform for pluralistic, issue-oriented
political debate. The OSCE also added
that the electoral legal framework formed
an adequate basis for democratic
elections, the right to seek an effective
remedy for electoral violations was
inclusive and generally respected, and the
election administration fulfilled its
mandate in a professional and
transparent manner and enjoyed overall
confidence among stakeholders. It also
expressed concerns about the delineation of
single-member constituencies. The Joint
Opinion of 18 June 2012 on the Act on the
Elections of Members of Parliament of
Hungary adopted by the Venice
Commission and the Council for
Democratic Elections identified the
delineation of single-member
constituencies as positive change, in line
with international standards and good
practice that as required by the
Constitutional Court, electoral
constituencies are less unequal than
previously, when the differences violated
the constitutional principles. It was
considered as an element that might
PE622.145v01-00 30/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMimprove the administration of elections.
Or. en
Amendment 51
Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 9
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(9) In its statement adopted on 9 April (9) In 2011, Fidesz politician János
2018, the limited election observation Lázár, has proposed a redesign to
mission of the OSCE Office for Hungarian voting districts; considering
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights the territorial results of previous elections,
concluded that the 2018 parliamentary this redesign is favouring the right-wing
elections were characterised by a pervasive politicians according to the opposition.
overlap between state and ruling party Since then, the law has been passed by the
resources, undermining the ability of Fidesz-majority Parliament. Formerly it
candidates to compete on an equal basis. took twice as many votes to gain a seat in
Voters had a wide range of political some election districts as in some others.
options but intimidating and xenophobic Gerrymandering is a practice intended to
rhetoric, media bias and opaque campaign establish a political advantage for a
financing constricted the space for genuine particular party or group by manipulating
political debate, hindering the ability of district boundaries. In its statement
voters to make a fully informed choice. It adopted on 9 April 2018, the limited
also expressed concerns about the election observation mission of the OSCE
delineation of single-member Office for Democratic Institutions and
constituencies. Similar concerns were Human Rights concluded that the 2018
expressed in the Joint Opinion of 18 June parliamentary elections were characterised
2012 on the Act on the Elections of by a pervasive overlap between state and
Members of Parliament of Hungary ruling party resources, undermining the
adopted by the Venice Commission and the ability of candidates to compete on an
Council for Democratic Elections. equal basis. Voters had a wide range of
political options but intimidating and
xenophobic rhetoric, media bias and
opaque campaign financing constricted the
space for genuine political debate,
hindering the ability of voters to make a
fully informed choice. It also expressed
concerns about the delineation of single-
member constituencies. Similar concerns
were expressed in the Joint Opinion of 18
June 2012 on the Act on the Elections of
Members of Parliament of Hungary
adopted by the Venice Commission and the
AM\1153493XM.docx 31/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMCouncil for Democratic Elections.
Or. en
Amendment 52
Lívia Járóka
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 9
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(9) In its statement adopted on 9 April (9) In its statement adopted on 9 April
2018, the limited election observation 2018, the limited election observation
mission of the OSCE Office for mission of the OSCE Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
concluded that the 2018 parliamentary expressed concerns about the delineation of
elections were characterised by a single-member constituencies. Similar
pervasive overlap between state and ruling concerns were expressed in the Joint
party resources, undermining the ability Opinion of 18 June 2012 on the Act on the
of candidates to compete on an equal Elections of Members of Parliament of
basis. Voters had a wide range of political Hungary adopted by the Venice
options but intimidating and xenophobic Commission and the Council for
rhetoric, media bias and opaque Democratic Elections, whereas the
campaign financing constricted the space electoral districts in Hungary are defined
for genuine political debate, hindering the with a view to the full application of the
ability of voters to make a fully informed principle of proportionality, as also
choice. It also expressed concerns about acknowledged by the decision of the
the delineation of single-member Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
constituencies. Similar concerns were Europe.
expressed in the Joint Opinion of 18 June
2012 on the Act on the Elections of
Members of Parliament of Hungary
adopted by the Venice Commission and the
Council for Democratic Elections.
Or. en
Amendment 53
Nadine Morano
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 9
PE622.145v01-00 32/43 AM\1153493XM.docx
XMMotion for a resolution Amendment
(9) Dans sa déclaration adoptée le 9 (9) Dans sa déclaration adoptée le 9
avril 2018, la mission d’observation avril 2018, la mission d’observation
électorale limitée du Bureau des électorale limitée du Bureau des
institutions démocratiques et des droits de institutions démocratiques et des droits de
l’homme de l’OSCE a conclu que les l’homme de l’OSCE a conclu que les
élections législatives de 2018 avaient été élections législatives de 2018 avaient été
marquées par une confusion généralisée marquées par une confusion généralisée
entre les ressources de l’État et celles du entre les ressources de l’État et celles du
parti au pouvoir, empêchant les candidats parti au pouvoir, empêchant les candidats
de se présenter aux élections sur un pied de se présenter aux élections sur un pied
d’égalité. Les électeurs disposaient certes d’égalité. Les électeurs disposaient d’un
d’un large éventail d’options politiques, large éventail d’options politiques, mais les
mais les intimidations, les propos intimidations, les propos xénophobes, le
xénophobes, le manque d’objectivité des manque d’objectivité des médias et
médias et l’opacité du financement de la l’opacité du financement de la campagne
campagne ont limité les possibilités de ont restreint le champ du débat politique.
débat politique véritable et empêché les La mission d’observation électorale s’est
électeurs de faire leur choix en toute également dite préoccupée par la
connaissance de cause. La mission délimitation des circonscriptions
d’observation électorale s’est également uninominales. Des préoccupations
dite préoccupée par la délimitation des semblables avaient été exprimées dans
circonscriptions uninominales. Des l’avis conjoint du 18 juin 2012 relatif à la
préoccupations semblables avaient été loi sur les élections des membres du
exprimées dans l’avis conjoint du 18 juin Parlement de Hongrie adopté par la
2012 relatif à la loi sur les élections des Commission de Venise et le Conseil des
membres du Parlement de Hongrie adopté élections démocratiques.
par la Commission de Venise et le Conseil
des élections démocratiques.
Or. fr
Amendment 54
József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – point 10
Motion for a resolution Amendment
(10) In recent years the Hungarian deleted
Government has extensively used national
consultations. On 27 April 2017, the
Commission pointed out that the national
consultation “Let’s stop Brussels”
AM\1153493XM.docx 33/43 PE622.145v01-00
XMVous pouvez aussi lire
