European Parliament 2019-2024

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

2017/0360R(NLE)

29.5.2020

AMENDMENTS 1 - 254

Draft report Juan Fernando López Aguilar (PE650.665v02-00)

Determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law (2017/0360R(NLE))

AM\1206319EN.docx PE652.541v01-00

EN United in diversityEN AM_Com_NonLegReport

PE652.541v01-00 2/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 1 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Pietro Bartolo, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Birgit Sippel, Łukasz Kohut, Bettina Vollath, Robert Biedroń, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri

Motion for a resolution Citation 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

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

Or. en

Amendment 2 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Citation 9 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- 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 of 16 December 2014;

Or. en

Amendment 3 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Citation 9 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to the Council Legal Service’s legal opinion of 27 May 2014 on the compatibility of the Commission’s Communication on a new EU Framework

AM\1206319EN.docx 3/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN to strengthen the Rule of Law with the Treaties;

Or. en

Amendment 4 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Citation 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to its resolution of 3 May 2018 on media pluralism and media freedom in the European Union,

Or. en

Amendment 5 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Citation 15

Motion for a resolution Amendment

— having regard to its resolution of deleted 14 November 2019 on the criminalisation of sexual education in Poland9, ______9 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2019)0058.

Or. pl

Amendment 6 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Citation 15

PE652.541v01-00 4/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

— having regard to its resolution of deleted 14 November 2019 on the criminalisation of sexual education in Poland9, ______9 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2019)0058.

Or. pl

Amendment 7 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Citation 16

Motion for a resolution Amendment

— having regard to its resolution of deleted 18 December 2019 on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones10, ______10 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2019)0101.

Or. pl

Amendment 8 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Citation 16

Motion for a resolution Amendment

— having regard to its resolution of deleted 18 December 2019 on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones10, ______

AM\1206319EN.docx 5/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN 10 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2019)0101.

Or. pl

Amendment 9 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Citation 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

— having regard to its resolution of deleted 17 April 2020 on EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences13, ______13 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2020)0054.

Or. pl

Amendment 10 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Pietro Bartolo, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Citation 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2019 on the Union’s accession to the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women 14a, ______14a Texts adopted, P9_TA(2019)0080.

Or. en

PE652.541v01-00 6/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 11 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution Citation 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to its legislative resolution of 17 April 2019 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Rights and Values programme 16a, ______16a Texts adopted, P8_TA(2019)0407.

Or. en

Amendment 12 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Citation 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

— having regard to the four — having regard to the four infringement procedures launched by the infringement procedures launched by the Commission against Poland in relation to Commission against Poland in relation to the reform of the Polish judicial system, of the changes to the Polish judicial system, which the first two resulted in judgments of of which the first two resulted in judgments the Court of Justice finding violations of of the Court of Justice finding violations of the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union of the Treaty on European Union enshrining the principle of effective enshrining the principle of effective judicial protection, while the two other judicial protection, while the two other procedures are still pending, procedures are still pending,

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 7/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 13 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Citation 25 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to the results of the LGBTI Survey II conducted by the Fundamental Rights Agency, which highlight an increase in intolerance and violence in Poland towards LGBTI persons, a complete disbelief in the government’s combat against prejudice and intolerance by Polish LGBTI respondents, recording the lowest percentage across the Union (only 4%), and the highest percentage of respondents avoiding going to certain places for fear of being assaulted, harassed or threatened (79%),

Or. en

Amendment 14 Maria Walsh

Motion for a resolution Citation 25 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to the results of the LGBTI Survey II conducted by the Fundamental Rights Agency, which highlight an increase in intolerance and violence in Poland towards LGBTI persons, a complete disbelief in the government’s combat against prejudice and intolerance by Polish LGBTI respondents, recording the lowest percentage across the Union (only 4%), and the highest percentage of respondents avoiding going to certain places for fear of being assaulted, harassed or threatened (79%),

PE652.541v01-00 8/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. en

Amendment 15 Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Citation 25 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to the results of the LGBTI Survey II conducted by the Fundamental Rights Agency, which highlight an increase in intolerance and violence in Poland towards LGBTI persons, a complete disbelief in the government’s combat against prejudice and intolerance by Polish LGBTI respondents, recording the lowest percentage across the Union (only 4%), and the highest percentage of respondents avoiding going to certain places for fear of being assaulted, harassed or threatened (79%),

Or. en

Amendment 16 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Citation 25 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to the issue paper of the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights of December 2017 entitled ‘Women’s sexual and reproductive health and rights in Europe’,

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 9/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 17 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Citation 25 c (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- having regard to the 2019 recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) on adolescent sexual and reproductive health and rights and the WHO Regional Office for Europe standards for sexuality education in Europe: a framework for policy makers, educational and health authorities and specialists,

Or. en

Amendment 18 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Recital A

Motion for a resolution Amendment

A. whereas the Union is founded on A. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, the values laid down in Article 2 of the freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of Treaty on European Union and as reflected law and respect for human rights, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the including the rights of persons belonging European Union and embedded in to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the international human rights treaties; Treaty on European Union and as reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and embedded in international human rights treaties;

Or. pl

Amendment 19 Balázs Hidvéghi

PE652.541v01-00 10/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Recital A

Motion for a resolution Amendment

A. whereas the Union is founded on A. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to the rights of persons belonging to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and as reflected Treaty on European Union; in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and embedded in international human rights treaties;

Or. en

Amendment 20 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Recital B

Motion for a resolution Amendment

B. whereas, in contrast to Article 258 B. whereas the scope of Article 7 of of the Treaty on the Functioning of the the Treaty on European Union is limited to European Union, the scope of Article 7 of the obligations under the Treaties, and the Treaty on European Union is not whereas the Union can assess the existence limited to the obligations under the of a clear risk of a serious breach of the Treaties, as indicated in the Commission common values in areas falling under the Communication of 15 October 2003, and competences of the Union, and Union whereas the Union can assess the existence monitoring mechanisms are only possible of a clear risk of a serious breach of the to this extent; whereas, additionally, the common values in areas falling under Council Legal Service recalled in its legal Member States’ competences; opinion of 27 May 2014 that there is no legal basis in the Treaties empowering the institutions to create a new supervision mechanism of the respect of the rule of law by the Member States, additional to what is laid down in Article 7 TEU;

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 11/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 21 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Recital B

Motion for a resolution Amendment

B. whereas, in contrast to Article 258 B. whereas, in contrast to Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the scope of Article 7 of European Union, the scope of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union is not the Treaty on European Union comprises limited to the obligations under the all foundational principles of the Treaties, as indicated in the Commission European Union referred to in Article 2 Communication of 15 October 2003, and of the Treaty on European Union, as whereas the Union can assess the existence indicated in the Commission of a clear risk of a serious breach of the Communication of 15 October 2003, and common values in areas falling under whereas the Union can assess the existence Member States’ competences; of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under Member States’ competences;

Or. en

Amendment 22 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Recital B

Motion for a resolution Amendment

B. whereas, in contrast to Article 258 B. whereas the scope of application of of the Treaty on the Functioning of the Article 7 of the Treaty on European European Union, the scope of Article 7 of Union is determined by the scope of the the Treaty on European Union is not Commission proposal and, in the absence limited to the obligations under the of an extension of the scope of the Treaties, as indicated in the Commission proposal, Parliament cannot arbitrarily Communication of 15 October 2003, and determine the area covered by the whereas the Union can assess the procedure; existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under Member States’

PE652.541v01-00 12/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN competences;

Or. pl

Amendment 23 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Ca. whereas the procedure under Article 7 TEU has its limits set by the reasoned proposal submitted by the Commission, and any matters not covered by it cannot be subject to the European Parliament’s consent procedure;

Or. pl

Amendment 24 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Ca. Underlines that the Member States of the European Union have, in accordance with Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union, freely and voluntarily committed themselves to the common values referred to in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

Or. en

Amendment 25 Beata Kempa

AM\1206319EN.docx 13/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Ca. whereas the procedure under Article 7 TEU has its limits set by the reasoned proposal submitted by the Commission, and any matters not covered by it cannot be subject to the European Parliament’s consent procedure;

Or. pl

Amendment 26 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Recital C b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Cb. Points out that the European Parliament’s role in the consent procedure is described in Article 7 and cannot be otherwise usurped; recalls that, according to Article 269 TFEU, only procedural matters can be challenged before the CJEU under Article 7 TEU;

Or. pl

Amendment 27 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Recital C b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Cb. Points out that the European Parliament’s role in the consent procedure is described in Article 7 and cannot be otherwise usurped; recalls that,

PE652.541v01-00 14/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN according to Article 269 TFEU, only procedural matters can be challenged before the CJEU under Article 7 TEU;

Or. pl

Amendment 28 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 – indent 3

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- the protection of fundamental deleted rights, including rights of persons belonging to minorities;

Or. pl

Amendment 29 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Tomas Tobé, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 – indent 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

- the functioning of a free and independent media;

Or. en

Amendment 30 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution Amendment

2. Reiterates its position, expressed in deleted

AM\1206319EN.docx 15/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN several of its resolutions on the situation of the rule of law and democracy in Poland, that the facts and trends mentioned in this resolution taken together represent a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereof;

Or. en

Amendment 31 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution Amendment

2. Reiterates its position, expressed in deleted several of its resolutions on the situation of the rule of law and democracy in Poland, that the facts and trends mentioned in this resolution taken together represent a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereof;

Or. pl

Amendment 32 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution Amendment

2. Reiterates its position, expressed in deleted several of its resolutions on the situation of the rule of law and democracy in Poland, that the facts and trends mentioned in this resolution taken together represent a systemic threat to the

PE652.541v01-00 16/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN values of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereof;

Or. pl

Amendment 33 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution Amendment

2. Reiterates its position, expressed in 2. Confirms that an assessment of a several of its resolutions on the situation possible breach of Article 2 of the Treaty of the rule of law and democracy in on European Union (TEU) should only be Poland, that the facts and trends made once the reform process in the areas mentioned in this resolution taken concerned has been completed; together represent a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereof;

Or. pl

Amendment 34 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 – point 1 (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(1) Takes note of the explanations provided by the Polish government as regards the reasons for the introduction of the reform of the judiciary and considers these explanations to be legitimate and convincing in the context of the concerns expressed by

AM\1206319EN.docx 17/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Member States;

Or. pl

Amendment 35 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution Amendment

3. Expresses its deep concern that, 3. Expresses its deep concern that, despite three hearings of Poland having despite three hearings of Poland having been held in the Council, alarming reports been held in the Council, alarming reports by the United Nations, the Organisation for by the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, and (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, and four infringements procedures launched by four infringements procedures launched by the Commission, the rule of law situation the Commission, the rule of law situation in Poland has not only not been addressed in Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU; triggering of Article 7(1) TEU; is of the opinion that discussions in the Council under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure have been neither regular nor structured, and have failed to address the substantial issues that warranted the procedure’s activation and to fully grasp the impact that the Polish government’s action is having on all Article 2 TEU principles;

Or. en

Amendment 36 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution Amendment

3. Expresses its deep concern that, 3. Stresses that the Polish despite three hearings of Poland having Government has thoroughly and been held in the Council, alarming repeatedly explained the reasons

PE652.541v01-00 18/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN reports by the United Nations, the behind the reform of the judiciary in Organisation for Security and Poland and outlined its basic principles; Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the welcomes the fact that the presentations Council of Europe, and four were comprehensive, addressing all infringements procedures launched by the concerns and questions raised by Member Commission, the rule of law situation in States and the European Commission; Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU;

Or. pl

Amendment 37 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution Amendment

3. Expresses its deep concern that, 3. Stresses that the Polish despite three hearings of Poland having Government has, pursuant to Article 7, been held in the Council, alarming thoroughly and repeatedly explained the reports by the United Nations, the reasons behind the reform of the judiciary Organisation for Security and in Poland and outlined its basic principles Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the welcomes the fact that the presentations Council of Europe, and four were comprehensive, addressing all infringements procedures launched by the concerns and questions raised by Member Commission, the rule of law situation in States and the European Commission; Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU;

Or. pl

Amendment 38 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution Amendment

3. Expresses its deep concern that, 3. Takes note of the three hearings of despite three hearings of Poland having Poland having been held in the Council,

AM\1206319EN.docx 19/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN been held in the Council, alarming reports the critical reports by the United Nations, by the United Nations, the Organisation for the Organisation for Security and Security and Cooperation in Europe Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, and Council of Europe, and four infringements four infringements procedures launched by procedures launched by the Commission; the Commission, the rule of law situation in Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU;

Or. en

Amendment 39 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Tomas Tobé, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution Amendment

3. Expresses its deep concern that, 3. Expresses its deep concern that, despite three hearings of Poland having despite three hearings of Poland having been held in the Council, alarming reports been held in the Council, multiple by the United Nations, the Organisation for exchanges of views in the Civil Liberties, Security and Cooperation in Europe Justice and Home Affairs Committee of (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, and the European Parliament, alarming four infringements procedures launched by reports by the United Nations, the the Commission, the rule of law situation Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Poland has not only not been addressed in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of but has seriously deteriorated since the Europe, and four infringements procedures triggering of Article 7(1) TEU; launched by the Commission, the rule of law situation in Poland has not only not been addressed but has seriously deteriorated since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU;

Or. en

Amendment 40 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4

PE652.541v01-00 20/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

4. Notes that the Commission’s deleted reasoned proposal of 20 December 2017 in accordance with Article 7(1) of the TEU regarding the rule of law in Poland: proposal for a Council decision on the determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law16 has a limited scope, namely the rule of law situation in Poland in the strict sense of independence of the judiciary; sees an urgent need to widen the scope of the reasoned proposal by including clear risks of serious breaches of other basic values of the Union, especially democracy and respect for human rights;

Or. pl

Amendment 41 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution Amendment

4. Notes that the Commission’s deleted reasoned proposal of 20 December 2017 in accordance with Article 7(1) of the TEU regarding the rule of law in Poland: proposal for a Council decision on the determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law16 has a limited scope, namely the rule of law situation in Poland in the strict sense of independence of the judiciary; sees an urgent need to widen the scope of the reasoned proposal by including clear risks of serious breaches of other basic values of the Union, especially democracy and respect for human rights;

AM\1206319EN.docx 21/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Or. pl

Amendment 42 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution Amendment

4. Notes that the Commission’s 4. Notes that the Commission’s reasoned proposal of 20 December 2017 in reasoned proposal of 20 December 2017 in accordance with Article 7(1) of the TEU accordance with Article7(1) of the TEU regarding the rule of law in Poland: regarding the rule of law in Poland: proposal for a Council decision on the proposal for a Council decision on the determination of a clear risk of a serious determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law16 has a limited scope, namely rule of law[16] has a limited scope, namely the rule of law situation in Poland in the the rule of law situation in Poland in the strict sense of independence of the strict sense of independence of the judiciary; sees an urgent need to widen the judiciary; calls on the Commission and scope of the reasoned proposal by the Council to refrain from narrowly including clear risks of serious breaches interpreting the rule of law principle, and of other basic values of the Union, to use the Article 7(1) of the TEU especially democracy and respect for procedure to its full potential, namely to human rights; address the implications of the Polish government’s action for all the principles enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU, especially democracy and respect for human rights;

Or. en

Amendment 43 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

4a. Notes that the Commission’s reasoned proposal of 20 December 2017, submitted in accordance with Article7(1) TEU, concerns the rule of law in Poland

PE652.541v01-00 22/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN within the strict sense of independence of the judiciary;

Or. pl

Amendment 44 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution Amendment

5. Takes the view that the latest deleted developments in the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU once again underline the imminent need for a complementary and preventive Union mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights as put forward by Parliament in its resolution of 25 October 2016;

Or. pl

Amendment 45 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution Amendment

5. Takes the view that the latest 5. Takes the view that the latest developments in the ongoing hearings developments in the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU once again under Article 7(1) TEU once again underline the imminent need for a underline the imminent need for a complementary and preventive Union complementary and preventive Union mechanism on democracy, the rule of law mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights as put forward by and fundamental rights (DRF) as put Parliament in its resolution of 25 October forward by Parliament in its resolution of 2016; 25 October 2016; recalls that if the Commission and Council continue to reject the establishment of a Pact for DRF, Parliament could take the initiative

AM\1206319EN.docx 23/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN to launch a pilot DRF report and an interparliamentary debate;

Or. en

Amendment 46 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution Amendment

5. Takes the view that the latest 5. Takes the view that the Article 7 developments in the ongoing hearings TEU procedure is the only procedure under Article 7(1) TEU once again available under the Treaties to safeguard underline the imminent need for a the rule of law and no complementary and complementary and preventive Union preventive Union mechanism can be put mechanism on democracy, the rule of law forward by the EU institutions; underlines and fundamental rights as put forward by that any monitoring of the rule of law Parliament in its resolution of 25 October shall respect the principles of objectivity, 2016; non-discrimination, equal treatment, a non-partisan and evidence-based approach;

Or. en

Amendment 47 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution Amendment

5. Takes the view that the latest 5. Notes that the Council has so far developments in the ongoing hearings not identified a risk of serious breach by under Article 7(1) TEU once again Poland of the values enshrined in Article underline the imminent need for a 2 TEU; emphasises that the Council is the complementary and preventive Union only EU institution with such a mechanism on democracy, the rule of law competence under the provisions of and fundamental rights as put forward by Article 7(1) TEU; Parliament in its resolution of 25 October 2016;

PE652.541v01-00 24/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. pl

Amendment 48 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution Amendment

5. Takes the view that the latest 5. Takes the view that the latest developments in the ongoing hearings developments in the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) TEU once again under Article 7(1) TEU once again underline the imminent need for a underline the imminent need for a complementary and preventive Union complementary, preventive and binding mechanism on democracy, the rule of law Union mechanism on democracy, the rule and fundamental rights as put forward by of law and fundamental rights as put Parliament in its resolution of 25 October forward by Parliament in its resolution of 2016; 25 October 2016;

Or. en

Amendment 49 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(1) Takes the opinion that, in the light of the Polish Government’s explanations and Parliament’s findings, there is no risk of a serious violation of the values expressed in Article 2 TEU being committed by Poland, and that the outcome of this procedure against Poland arising from the Commission’s proposal does not provide sufficient grounds for concluding that an additional new mechanism for the evaluation of

AM\1206319EN.docx 25/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights is necessary;

Or. pl

Amendment 50 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution Amendment

6. Reiterates its position on the deleted proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, including the need to safeguard the rights of beneficiaries, and calls on the Council to start interinstitutional negotiations as soon as possible;

Or. en

Amendment 51 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution Amendment

6. Reiterates its position on the deleted proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, including the need to safeguard the rights of beneficiaries, and calls on the Council to start interinstitutional negotiations as soon as possible;

PE652.541v01-00 26/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. pl

Amendment 52 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution Amendment

6. Reiterates its position on the 6. Stresses that the conditionality proposal for a regulation of the European of the disbursement of EU funds must be Parliament and of the Council on the based on objective and measurable protection of the Union’s budget in case criteria; notes that any non-economic and of generalised deficiencies as regards the political criteria create a flagrant risk of rule of law in the Member States, their instrumentalisation and introduce including the need to safeguard the rights uncertainty for the beneficiaries of EU of beneficiaries, and calls on the Council funds; recalls Opinion No 1/2018 of the to start interinstitutional negotiations as European Court of Auditors, which soon as possible; expressly draws attention to the above- mentioned element and to the risk of loss of funding by the beneficiaries of funds.

Or. pl

Amendment 53 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

6a. Reiterates its position as regards the budget envelope for the new Rights and Values Programme within the next Multiannual Financial Framework, and calls to ensure that adequate funding is provided for national and local civil society organizations to grow grassroots support for democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights in the Member States, including Poland;

AM\1206319EN.docx 27/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Or. en

Amendment 54 Tomas Tobé

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

6a. Recalls that Parliament must give its consent to the Multiannual Financial Framework; reiterates its demand for a mechanism to protect the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States; stands ready to reject any proposal that would not sufficiently meet these standards;

Or. en

Amendment 55 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 1

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Functioning of the legislative and deleted electoral system in Poland

Or. pl

Amendment 56 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Subheading 2

PE652.541v01-00 28/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

Usurpation of powers of constitutional deleted revision by the Polish parliament

Or. pl

Amendment 57 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 2

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Usurpation of powers of constitutional deleted revision by the Polish parliament

Or. pl

Amendment 58 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution Amendment

7. Denounces that the Polish deleted parliament assumed powers of constitutional revision which it did not have when it acted as the ordinary legislature in adopting the act of 22 December 2015 amending the act on the Constitutional Court and the act of 22 July 2016 on the Constitutional Tribunal, as found by the Constitutional Tribunal in its judgments of 9 March, 11 August and 7 November 201617; ______

AM\1206319EN.docx 29/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN 17 See Venice Commission Opinion of 14 October 2016 on the Law of 22 July 2016 on the Constitutional Tribunal, Opinion no. 860/2016, para. 127; Commission Reasoned Proposal of 20 December 2017, paras 91 and following.

Or. pl

Amendment 59 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution Amendment

8. Regrets, furthermore, that many deleted particularly sensitive legislative acts have been adopted by the Polish parliament at a time when independent constitutional review of laws can no longer be effectively guaranteed, such as the act of 30 December 2015 amending the act on Civil Service and certain other acts, the act of 15 January 2016 amending the act on the police and certain other acts, the act of 28 January 2016 on the public prosecution office and the act of 28 January 2016 - regulations implementing the act on the public prosecution office, the act of 18 March 2016 amending the act on the Ombudsman and certain other acts, the act of 22 June 2016 on the National Media Council, the act of 10 June 2016 on anti-terrorist actions and several other acts fundamentally reorganising the judicial system18; ______18 See Commission Reasoned Proposal of 20 December 2017, paras 112-113.

Or. pl

PE652.541v01-00 30/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 60 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution Amendment

8. Regrets, furthermore, that many deleted particularly sensitive legislative acts have been adopted by the Polish parliament at a time when independent constitutional review of laws can no longer be effectively guaranteed, such as the act of 30 December 2015 amending the act on Civil Service and certain other acts, the act of 15 January 2016 amending the act on the police and certain other acts, the act of 28 January 2016 on the public prosecution office and the act of 28 January 2016 - regulations implementing the act on the public prosecution office, the act of 18 March 2016 amending the act on the Ombudsman and certain other acts, the act of 22 June 2016 on the National Media Council, the act of 10 June 2016 on anti-terrorist actions and several other acts fundamentally reorganising the judicial system18; ______18 See Commission Reasoned Proposal of 20 December 2017, paras 112-113.

Or. pl

Amendment 61 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 3

AM\1206319EN.docx 31/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

The use of expedited legislative deleted procedures

Or. pl

Amendment 62 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution Amendment

9. Deplores the frequent use of deleted expedited legislative procedures by the Polish parliament for the adoption of crucial legislation redesigning the organisation and functioning of the judiciary, without meaningful consultation with stakeholders, including the judicial community19; ______19 ENCJ, Warsaw Declaration of 3 June 2016.

Or. pl

Amendment 63 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution Amendment

9. Deplores the frequent use of 9. Notes the frequent use of expedited expedited legislative procedures by the legislative procedures by the Polish Polish parliament for the adoption of parliament; crucial legislation redesigning the organisation and functioning of the

PE652.541v01-00 32/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN judiciary, without meaningful consultation with stakeholders, including the judicial community19 ; ______19 ENCJ, Warsaw Declaration of 3 June 2016.

Or. en

Amendment 64 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution Amendment

10. Denounces that, during the deleted COVID-19 outbreak, but not linked with the COVID-19 outbreak, legislation is being debated or even rushed through in Parliament in very sensitive areas such as abortion, sexual education, the organisation of elections or the term of office of the President, the latter even requiring a change to the Constitution; underlines that this could amount to abuse of the fact that citizens cannot organise or protest publicly, which would seriously undermine the legitimacy of the legislation adopted;

Or. en

Amendment 65 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1206319EN.docx 33/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN 10. Denounces that, during the deleted COVID-19 outbreak, but not linked with the COVID-19 outbreak, legislation is being debated or even rushed through in Parliament in very sensitive areas such as abortion, sexual education, the organisation of elections or the term of office of the President, the latter even requiring a change to the Constitution; underlines that this could amount to abuse of the fact that citizens cannot organise or protest publicly, which would seriously undermine the legitimacy of the legislation adopted;

Or. pl

Amendment 66 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution Amendment

10. Denounces that, during the 10. Stresses that the proposal COVID-19 outbreak, but not linked with concerning abortion is a citizens’ the COVID-19 outbreak, legislation is initiative, submitted on 30 November being debated or even rushed through in 2017, and under current Polish law it had Parliament in very sensitive areas such as to be taken into consideration and abortion, sexual education, the submitted for parliamentary action; organisation of elections or the term of office of the President, the latter even requiring a change to the Constitution; underlines that this could amount to abuse of the fact that citizens cannot organise or protest publicly, which would seriously undermine the legitimacy of the legislation adopted;

Or. pl

Amendment 67 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

PE652.541v01-00 34/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution Amendment

10. Denounces that, during the 10. Stresses that the proposal COVID-19 outbreak, but not linked with concerning abortion is a citizens’ the COVID-19 outbreak, legislation is initiative, and not a government one, and being debated or even rushed through in was submitted on 30 November 2017 by a Parliament in very sensitive areas such as group of at least 100 000 entitled persons abortion, sexual education, the and initiated by the ‘Stop Abortion’ organisation of elections or the term of Legislative Initiative Committee; recalls office of the President, the latter even that, in accordance with the regulations in requiring a change to the Constitution; force, the project was submitted for underlines that this could amount to parliamentary action and has been on the abuse of the fact that citizens cannot agenda for over two-and-a-half years; organise or protest publicly, which would seriously undermine the legitimacy of the legislation adopted;

Or. pl

Amendment 68 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution Amendment

10. Denounces that, during the 10. Denounces that, during the COVID-19 outbreak, but not linked with COVID-19 outbreak, but not linked with the COVID-19 outbreak, legislation is the COVID-19 outbreak, legislation is being debated or even rushed through in being debated or even rushed through in Parliament in very sensitive areas such as Parliament in very sensitive areas such as abortion, sexual education, the sexual education, the organisation of organisation of elections or the term of elections or the term of office of the office of the President, the latter even President, the latter even requiring a requiring a change to the Constitution; change to the Constitution; underlines that underlines that this could amount to abuse this could amount to abuse of the fact that of the fact that citizens cannot organise or citizens cannot organise or protest publicly, protest publicly, which would seriously which would seriously undermine the undermine the legitimacy of the legislation legitimacy of the legislation adopted; adopted;

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 35/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 69 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

10a. Recalls that the Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 December 2013 on sexual and reproductive health and rights (2013/2040(INI)) ‘notes that the formulation and implementation of policies on SRHR and on sexual education in schools is a competence of the Member States’;

Or. pl

Amendment 70 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 4

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Electoral law and organisation of deleted elections

Or. pl

Amendment 71 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE652.541v01-00 36/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 11. Notes with concern that the OSCE deleted concluded that media bias and intolerant rhetoric in the campaign were of significant concern20and that, while all candidates were able to campaign freely, senior state officials used publicly funded events for campaign messaging; notes, furthermore, that the dominance of the ruling party in public media further amplified its advantage21; ______20 OSCE/ODIHR, Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions after its Limited Election Observation Mission, 14 October 2019. 21 OSCE/ODIHR, Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report on the parliamentary elections of 13 October 2019, Warsaw, 14 February 2020.

Or. pl

Amendment 72 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution Amendment

11. Notes with concern that the OSCE deleted concluded that media bias and intolerant rhetoric in the campaign were of significant concern20and that, while all candidates were able to campaign freely, senior state officials used publicly funded events for campaign messaging; notes, furthermore, that the dominance of the ruling party in public media further amplified its advantage21; ______20 OSCE/ODIHR, Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions after its Limited Election Observation

AM\1206319EN.docx 37/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Mission, 14 October 2019. 21 OSCE/ODIHR, Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report on the parliamentary elections of 13 October 2019, Warsaw, 14 February 2020.

Or. pl

Amendment 73 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution Amendment

11. Notes with concern that the OSCE 11. Notes with concern that the OSCE concluded that media bias and intolerant concluded that media bias and intolerant rhetoric in the campaign were of rhetoric in the campaign for the October significant concern20 and that, while all 2019 parliamentary elections were of candidates were able to campaign freely, significant concern20 and that, while all senior state officials used publicly funded candidates were able to campaign freely, events for campaign messaging; notes, senior state officials used publicly funded furthermore, that the dominance of the events for campaign messaging; notes, ruling party in public media further furthermore, that the dominance of the amplified its advantage21 ; ruling party in public media further amplified its advantage21; ______20 OSCE/ODIHR, Statement of Preliminary 20 OSCE/ODIHR, Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions after its Limited Findings and Conclusions after its Limited Election Observation Mission, 14 October Election Observation Mission, 14 October 2019. 2019. 21 OSCE/ODIHR, Limited Election 21 OSCE/ODIHR, Limited Election Observation Mission Final Report on the Observation Mission Final Report on the parliamentary elections of 13 October parliamentary elections of 13 October 2019, Warsaw, 14 February 2020. 2019, Warsaw, 14 February 2020.

Or. en

Amendment 74 Beata Kempa

PE652.541v01-00 38/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution Amendment

12. Is concerned that the new deleted Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Matters of the Supreme Court (hereinafter the ‘Extraordinary Chamber’), which is composed in majority of judges nominated by the new National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ) and risks not to qualify as independent tribunal in the assessment of the CJEU, is to ascertain the validity of general and local elections and to examine electoral disputes; this raises serious concerns as regards the separation of powers and the functioning of Polish democracy, in that it makes judicial review of electoral disputes particularly vulnerable to political influence22; ______22 Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, CDL-AD(2017)031, para. 43; Third Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520 of 26 July 2017, para. 135.

Or. pl

Amendment 75 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution Amendment

12. Is concerned that the new deleted Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Matters of the Supreme Court (hereinafter the ‘Extraordinary Chamber’), which is composed in

AM\1206319EN.docx 39/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN majority of judges nominated by the new National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ) and risks not to qualify as independent tribunal in the assessment of the CJEU, is to ascertain the validity of general and local elections and to examine electoral disputes; this raises serious concerns as regards the separation of powers and the functioning of Polish democracy, in that it makes judicial review of electoral disputes particularly vulnerable to political influence22; ______22 Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, CDL-AD(2017)031, para. 43; Third Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520 of 26 July 2017, para. 135.

Or. pl

Amendment 76 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution Amendment

12. Is concerned that the new Chamber 12. Is concerned that the new Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public of Extraordinary Control and Public Matters of the Supreme Court (hereinafter Matters of the Supreme Court (hereinafter the ‘Extraordinary Chamber’), which is the ‘Extraordinary Chamber’), which is composed in majority of judges nominated composed in majority of judges nominated by the new National Council of the by the new National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ) and risks not to qualify as Judiciary (NCJ) and risks not to qualify as independent tribunal in the assessment of independent tribunal in the assessment of the CJEU, is to ascertain the validity of the CJEU, is to ascertain the validity of general and local elections and to examine general and local elections and to examine electoral disputes; this raises serious electoral disputes; this raises serious concerns as regards the separation of concerns as regards the separation of powers and the functioning of Polish powers and the functioning of Polish democracy, in that it makes judicial review democracy, in that it makes judicial review of electoral disputes particularly vulnerable of electoral disputes particularly vulnerable

PE652.541v01-00 40/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN to political influence22 ; to political influence and is capable of creating legal uncertainty as to the validity of such review22 ; ______22 Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 22 Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, CDL-AD(2017)031, para. December 2017, CDL-AD(2017)031, para. 43; Third Commission Recommendation 43; Third Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520 of 26 July 2017, para. (EU) 2017/1520 of 26 July 2017, para. 135. 135.

Or. en

Amendment 77 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution Amendment

12. Is concerned that the new Chamber 12. Is concerned that the new Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public of Extraordinary Control and Public Matters of the Supreme Court (hereinafter Matters of the Supreme Court (hereinafter the ‘Extraordinary Chamber’), which is the ‘Extraordinary Chamber’), which is composed in majority of judges nominated composed in majority of judges nominated by the new National Council of the by the new National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ) and risks not to qualify as Judiciary (NCJ) and risks not to qualify as independent tribunal in the assessment of independent tribunal in the assessment of the CJEU, is to ascertain the validity of the CJEU, is to ascertain the validity of general and local elections and to examine general elections and to examine electoral electoral disputes; this raises serious disputes; this raises serious concerns as concerns as regards the separation of regards the separation of powers and the powers and the functioning of Polish functioning of Polish democracy, in that it democracy, in that it makes judicial review makes judicial review of electoral disputes of electoral disputes particularly vulnerable particularly vulnerable to political to political influence22 ; influence22 ; ______22 Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 22 Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, CDL-AD(2017)031, para. December 2017, CDL-AD(2017)031, para. 43; Third Commission Recommendation 43; Third Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520 of 26 July 2017, para. (EU) 2017/1520 of 26 July 2017, para. 135. 135.

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 41/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 78 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution Amendment

13. Is concerned, while recognising deleted the extraordinary circumstances created by the COVID-19 health crisis, about the amendments to the electoral legislation being considered in the Polish parliament shortly before the presidential elections which change the practical organisation of the elections in order to proceed to a vote by postal services, which could impede the elections from taking a fair, secret and equal course, respectful of the right to privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council23and which moreover run counter to the case law of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal; stresses, moreover, that it is very difficult to organise a genuine election campaign giving an equal share of attention and equal opportunities to all candidates and programmes and allowing for real public debate in the midst of an epidemic24; ______23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act on special rules for conducting the general election of the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. 99), 27 April 2020.

PE652.541v01-00 42/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. pl

Amendment 79 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution Amendment

13. Is concerned, while recognising deleted the extraordinary circumstances created by the COVID-19 health crisis, about the amendments to the electoral legislation being considered in the Polish parliament shortly before the presidential elections which change the practical organisation of the elections in order to proceed to a vote by postal services, which could impede the elections from taking a fair, secret and equal course, respectful of the right to privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council23and which moreover run counter to the case law of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal; stresses, moreover, that it is very difficult to organise a genuine election campaign giving an equal share of attention and equal opportunities to all candidates and programmes and allowing for real public debate in the midst of an epidemic24; ______23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act on special rules for conducting the

AM\1206319EN.docx 43/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN general election of the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. 99), 27 April 2020.

Or. pl

Amendment 80 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution Amendment

13. Is concerned, while recognising the 13. Is concerned, while recognising the extraordinary circumstances created by the extraordinary circumstances created by the COVID-19 health crisis, about the COVID-19 health crisis, about the amendments to the electoral legislation amendments to the electoral legislation being considered in the Polish parliament being considered in the Polish parliament shortly before the presidential elections shortly before the presidential elections which change the practical organisation of which change the practical organisation of the elections in order to proceed to a vote the elections in order to proceed to a vote by postal services, which could impede the by postal services, which could impede the elections from taking a fair, secret and elections from taking a fair, secret and equal course, respectful of the right to equal course, respectful of the right to privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the the European Parliament and of the Council23 and which moreover run counter Council23 and which moreover run counter to the case law of the Polish Constitutional to the case law of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal; stresses, moreover, that it is very Tribunal; stresses, moreover, that it is very difficult to organise a genuine election difficult to organise a genuine election campaign giving an equal share of campaign giving an equal share of attention and equal opportunities to all attention and equal opportunities to all candidates and programmes and allowing candidates and programmes and allowing for real public debate in the midst of an for real public debate in the midst of an epidemic24 ; epidemic24 ; notes with concern that the elections, originally scheduled to be held on 10 May 2020, were eventually postponed without respecting formal legal requirements; ______23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the 23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural

PE652.541v01-00 44/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN persons with regard to the processing of persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act on special rules for conducting the general on special rules for conducting the general election of the President of the Republic of election of the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. 99), 27 April 2020. 99), 27 April 2020.

Or. en

Amendment 81 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution Amendment

13. Is concerned, while recognising the 13. Is concerned, while recognising the extraordinary circumstances created by the extraordinary circumstances created by the COVID-19 health crisis, about the COVID-19 health crisis, about the amendments to the electoral legislation amendments to the electoral legislation being considered in the Polish parliament being considered in the Polish parliament shortly before the presidential elections shortly before the presidential elections which change the practical organisation of which change the practical organisation of the elections in order to proceed to a vote the elections in order to proceed to a vote by postal services, which could impede the by postal services, which could impede the elections from taking a fair, secret and elections from taking a fair, secret and equal course, respectful of the right to equal course, respectful of the right to privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the the European Parliament and of the Council23 and which moreover run counter Council23 and which moreover run counter to the case law of the Polish Constitutional to the case law of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal; stresses, moreover, that it is very Tribunal when constitutional review was difficult to organise a genuine election still effective; stresses, moreover, that it is campaign giving an equal share of very difficult to organise a genuine election attention and equal opportunities to all campaign giving an equal share of candidates and programmes and allowing attention and equal opportunities to all for real public debate in the midst of an candidates and programmes and allowing epidemic24 ; for real public debate in the midst of an epidemic24 ;

AM\1206319EN.docx 45/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN ______23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the 23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act on special rules for conducting the general on special rules for conducting the general election of the President of the Republic of election of the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. 99), 27 April 2020. 99), 27 April 2020.

Or. en

Amendment 82 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution Amendment

13. Is concerned, while recognising 13. Recognises the extraordinary the extraordinary circumstances created by circumstances created by the COVID-19 the COVID-19 health crisis, about the health crisis, and thus the amendments to amendments to the electoral legislation the electoral legislation being considered in being considered in the Polish parliament the Polish parliament which would change shortly before the presidential elections the practical organisation of the elections which change the practical organisation of in order to proceed to a vote by postal the elections in order to proceed to a vote services; notes that voting by postal by postal services, which could impede the services could be a possibility to hold elections from taking a fair, secret and elections in these difficult times, while it is equal course, respectful of the right to important to carefully consider its privacy and Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of circumstances and to draw conclusions the European Parliament and of the from the practices of other Member States Council23 and which moreover run holding elections by postal services; counter to the case law of the Polish stresses, moreover, that it is very difficult Constitutional Tribunal; stresses, to organise a genuine election campaign moreover, that it is very difficult to giving an equal share of attention and equal organise a genuine election campaign opportunities to all candidates and giving an equal share of attention and equal programmes and allowing for real public opportunities to all candidates and debate in the midst of an epidemic24 ; programmes and allowing for real public

PE652.541v01-00 46/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN debate in the midst of an epidemic24 ; ______23 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act 24 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the draft act on special rules for conducting the general on special rules for conducting the general election of the President of the Republic of election of the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. Poland ordered in 2020 (Senate Paper No. 99), 27 April 2020. 99), 27 April 2020.

Or. en

Amendment 83 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

13a. Notes that the Venice Commission provides clear guidelines on the holding of general elections during public emergencies including epidemics; is concerned that recent changes to the electoral law in Poland are not compatible with the Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters; further notes that while the Code foresees the possibility of exceptional voting modalities, any amendments to introduce these may only be considered in accordance with best European practices ‘if the principle of free suffrage is guaranteed’; considers that this is not the case with regard to the amendments to the electoral framework for the presidential elections that are due to take place in 2020;24a

AM\1206319EN.docx 47/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN ______24a Venice Commission, CDL- PI(2020)005rev-e Report - Respect for Democracy Human Rights and Rule of Law during States of Emergency - Reflections, p. 23.

Or. en

Amendment 84 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Subheading 6

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Reform of the justice system – general Changes to the justice system – general considerations considerations

Or. en

Amendment 85 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution Amendment

14. Recognises that the organisation of 14. Recognises that while the the justice system is a national organisation of justice in the Member competence; reiterates that, all the same, States falls within their competence, the national judges are essentially also Member States are required to comply European judges, applying Union law, with their obligations under Union law which is the reason why the Union, when exercising this competence, as including the CJEU, has to watch over the repeatedly held by the CJEU; reiterates independence of the judiciary in all the that national judges are also European Member States as one of the exigencies of judges, making their independence a the rule of law and as laid down in Article common concern for the Union, including the Court of Justice; calls on the Polish

PE652.541v01-00 48/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter; authorities to uphold and maintain the independence of Polish courts; calls on the Commission and the Council to take all necessary measures to ensure that Polish courts remain independent and are able to ensure effective judicial protection as required by Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter;

Or. en

Amendment 86 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution Amendment

14. Recognises that the organisation of 14. Recognises that the organisation of the justice system is a national the justice system is a national competence; reiterates that, all the same, competence; national judges are essentially also European judges, applying Union law, which is the reason why the Union, including the CJEU, has to watch over the independence of the judiciary in all the Member States as one of the exigencies of the rule of law and as laid down in Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter;

Or. pl

Amendment 87 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution Amendment

14. Recognises that the organisation of 14. Recognises that the organisation of

AM\1206319EN.docx 49/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN the justice system is a national the justice system is a national competence; reiterates that, all the same, competence; reiterates that national judges national judges are essentially also are essentially also European judges, European judges, applying Union law, applying Union law, whilst the Union, which is the reason why the Union, including the CJEU, has no competence to including the CJEU, has to watch over the speak out regarding the independence of independence of the judiciary in all the the judiciary in the Member States; Member States as one of the exigencies of the rule of law and as laid down in Article 19 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter;

Or. pl

Amendment 88 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution Amendment

15. Recalls that the acts concerning the 15. Recalls that the acts concerning the Constitutional Tribunal adopted on 22 Constitutional Tribunal adopted on 22 December 2015 and 22 July 2016 seriously December 2015 and 22 July 2016, as well affected the Constitutional Tribunal’s as the package of three acts adopted at the independence and legitimacy and were end of 2016, seriously affected the therefore declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Tribunal’s independence Constitutional Tribunal on respectively 9 and legitimacy and that the first two acts March 2016 and 11 August 2016; recalls were declared unconstitutional by the that those judgments were not published at Constitutional Tribunal on respectively 9 the time nor implemented by the Polish March 2016 and 11 August 2016; recalls authorities; seriously deplores the lack of that those judgments were not published at independent and effective constitutional the time nor implemented by the Polish review in Poland25 ; invites the authorities; seriously deplores the lack of Commission to consider launching an independent and effective constitutional infringement procedure in relation to the review in Poland since the entry into force legislation on the Constitutional Tribunal; of the aforementioned legislative changes25; invites the Commission to consider launching an infringement procedure in relation to the legislation on the Constitutional Tribunal; ______25 Venice Commission Opinion of 14-15 25 Venice Commission Opinion of 14-15 October 2016, para. 128; UN, Human October 2016, para. 128; UN, Human

PE652.541v01-00 50/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Rights Committee, Concluding Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 31 October 2016, paras 7-8; of Poland, 31 October 2016, paras 7-8; Commission Recommendation (EU) Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520. 2017/1520.

Or. en

Amendment 89 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution Amendment

15. Recalls that the acts concerning 15. Considers that the assessment of the Constitutional Tribunal adopted on 22 the legal nature of the Constitutional December 2015 and 22 July 2016 Tribunal’s statements of 9 March 2016 seriously affected the Constitutional and 11 August 2016 on the Tribunal’s independence and legitimacy unconstitutionality of the laws concerning and were therefore declared the Constitutional Tribunal remain outside unconstitutional by the Constitutional the Union’s competence and that, in the Tribunal on respectively 9 March 2016 light of subsequent legislative and 11 August 2016; recalls that those developments and the case-law of the judgments were not published at the time Constitutional Tribunal, these statements nor implemented by the Polish are of historical value, making it authorities; seriously deplores the lack of superfluous to consider launching an independent and effective constitutional infringement procedure in respect of the review in Poland25; invites the provisions concerning the Constitutional Commission to consider launching an Tribunal; infringement procedure in relation to the legislation on the Constitutional Tribunal; ______25 Venice Commission Opinion of 14-15 October 2016, para. 128; UN, Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 31 October 2016, paras 7-8; Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520.

Or. pl

AM\1206319EN.docx 51/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 90 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution Amendment

15. Recalls that the acts concerning the 15. Recalls that the acts concerning the Constitutional Tribunal adopted on 22 Constitutional Tribunal adopted on 22 December 2015 and 22 July 2016 seriously December 2015 and 22 July 2016 seriously affected the Constitutional Tribunal’s affected the Constitutional Tribunal’s independence and legitimacy and were independence and legitimacy and were therefore declared unconstitutional by the therefore declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Tribunal on respectively 9 Constitutional Tribunal on respectively 9 March 2016 and 11 August 2016; recalls March 2016 and 11 August 2016; recalls that those judgments were not published at that those judgments were not published the time nor implemented by the Polish nor implemented by the Polish authorities; authorities; seriously deplores the lack of seriously deplores the lack of independent independent and effective constitutional and effective constitutional review in review in Poland25 ; invites the Poland25 ; invites the Commission to Commission to consider launching an consider launching an infringement infringement procedure in relation to the procedure in relation to the legislation on legislation on the Constitutional Tribunal; the Constitutional Tribunal, its current unlawful composition and its active role in preventing compliance with the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of 19 November 2019; ______25 Venice Commission Opinion of 14-15 25 Venice Commission Opinion of 14-15 October 2016, para. 128; UN, Human October 2016, para. 128; UN, Human Rights Committee, Concluding Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 31 October 2016, paras 7-8; of Poland, 31 October 2016, paras 7-8; Commission Recommendation (EU) Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/1520. 2017/1520.

Or. en

Amendment 91 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar

PE652.541v01-00 52/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution Amendment

16. Recalls that, already in 2017, 16. Recalls that, already in 2017, changes in the method of nomination of changes in the method of nomination of candidates to the position of the First candidates to the position of the First President of the Supreme Court deprived President of the Supreme Court deprived the participation of the Supreme Court the participation of the Supreme Court judges in the selection procedure of any judges in the selection procedure of any meaningful effect and put the decision in meaningful effect; denounces that recent the hands of the President of the amendments to the act on the Supreme Republic; denounces that recent Court even further reduce the participation amendments to the act on the Supreme of the judges in the process of selection of Court even further reduce the participation the First President of the Supreme Court by of the judges in the process of selection of introducing a position of First President ad the First President of the Supreme Court by interim appointed by the President of the introducing a position of First President ad Republic and by reducing the quorum in interim appointed by the President of the the third round to 32 out of 120 judges Republic and by reducing the quorum in only, thereby effectively abandoning the the third round to 32 out of 120 judges model of power-sharing between the only, thereby effectively abandoning the President and the judicial community model of power-sharing between the enshrined in Article 183(3) of the Polish President and the judicial community Constitution26; notes with concern the enshrined in Article 183(3) of the Polish irregularities surrounding the nomination Constitution26 ; of the First President ad interim and his further actions; notes that, on 25 May 2020, the President of the Republic of Poland did not choose the candidate with the largest support among the Supreme Court judges as First President of the Supreme Court; ______26 Venice Commission and DGI of the 26 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, CDL-PI(2020)002, paras 16 January 2020, CDL-PI(2020)002, paras 51-55. 51-55.

Or. en

Amendment 92 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

AM\1206319EN.docx 53/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution Amendment

16. Recalls that, already in 2017, 16. Recognises that the changes in the changes in the method of nomination of method of nomination of candidates to the candidates to the position of the First position of the First President of the President of the Supreme Court deprived Supreme Court take into account the the participation of the Supreme Court participation of Supreme Court judges in judges in the selection procedure of any the selection procedure, while the role of meaningful effect and put the decision in the President of the Republic of Poland in the hands of the President of the Republic; this procedure is consistent with the denounces that recent amendments to the principle of governmental checks and act on the Supreme Court even further balances; recognises that the introduction reduce the participation of the judges in of the post of Supreme Court judge ad the process of selection of the First interim holding the office of First President of the Supreme Court by President of the Supreme Court is a introducing a position of First President systemic solution aimed at ensuring the ad interim appointed by the President of effective conduct of the election of the the Republic and by reducing the quorum First President of the Supreme Court in the third round to 32 out of 120 judges without undue delay; only, thereby effectively abandoning the model of power-sharing between the President and the judicial community enshrined in Article 183(3) of the Polish Constitution26; ______26 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, CDL-PI(2020)002, paras 51-55.

Or. pl

Amendment 93 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution Amendment

16. Recalls that, already in 2017, 16. Recalls that, already in 2017,

PE652.541v01-00 54/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN changes in the method of nomination of changes in the method of nomination of candidates to the position of the First candidates to the position of the First President of the Supreme Court deprived President of the Supreme Court deprived the participation of the Supreme Court the participation of the Supreme Court judges in the selection procedure of any judges in the selection procedure of any meaningful effect and put the decision in meaningful effect and put the decision in the hands of the President of the Republic; the hands of the President of the Republic; denounces that recent amendments to the denounces that recent amendments to the act on the Supreme Court even further act on the Supreme Court even further reduce the participation of the judges in the reduce the participation of the judges in the process of selection of the First President process of selection of the First President of the Supreme Court by introducing a of the Supreme Court by introducing a position of First President ad interim position of First President ad interim appointed by the President of the Republic appointed by the President of the Republic and by reducing the quorum in the third and by reducing the quorum in the third round to 32 out of 120 judges only, thereby round to 32 out of 125 judges only, thereby effectively abandoning the model of effectively abandoning the model of power-sharing between the President and power-sharing between the President and the judicial community enshrined in Article the judicial community enshrined in Article 183(3) of the Polish Constitution26 ; 183(3) of the Polish Constitution26 ; ______26 Venice Commission and DGI of the 26 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, CDL-PI(2020)002, paras 16 January 2020, CDL-PI(2020)002, paras 51-55. 51-55. (The number of judges of the Supreme Court has been increased from 120 to 125 by virtue of the Ordinance of the President of the Republic of Poland of 3 June 2019, amending the relevant Regulation of the Supreme Court.)

Or. en

Amendment 94 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

16a. Notes that upon conclusion of the term in office of the First President of the Supreme Court in April 2020, the

AM\1206319EN.docx 55/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN President of Poland nominated as subsequent Acting First President of the Supreme Court a judge whose independence and impartiality could be put into question; notes that the above- mentioned Acting President, as well as his successor, also nominated as Judge of the Supreme Court by the new NCJ, were responsible for organising the election of candidates for the next First President of the Supreme Court by the General Assembly of the Supreme Court;

Or. en

Amendment 95 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Tomas Tobé, Javier Zarzalejos, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

16b. Is deeply concerned that the process of electing the candidates did not conform to the rules of procedure of the Supreme Court and violated basic standards of deliberation among the members of the General Assembly; further states its concern about reports of attempts by the Acting Presidents to inhibit dialogue among the judges who participated in the election and about alleged attempts to manipulate the vote in the General Assembly;

Or. en

Amendment 96 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 c (new)

PE652.541v01-00 56/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

16c. Notes with regret that doubts concerning the validity of the election process in the General Assembly as well as the impartiality and independence of the Acting Presidents during the election process could undermine the legitimacy of the new First President of the Supreme Court nominated by the President of Poland on 25 May 2020, and could thus put into question the independence of the Supreme Court;

Or. en

Amendment 97 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 d (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

16d. Regrets that on 25 May 2020, the President of Poland nominated the new First President of the Supreme Court, although the General Assembly of the Supreme Court had not yet officially submitted a list of candidates to the President, as required by Article 183 of the Polish Constitution, which further undermines the separation of powers and negatively affects the legitimacy of the new First President of the Supreme Court; recalls that a similar violation of law by the President of Poland occurred when nominating the President of the Constitutional Tribunal;

Or. en

Amendment 98

AM\1206319EN.docx 57/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution Amendment

17. Shares the Commission’s concern 17. Recognises that the powers of the that the power of the President of the President of the Republic of Poland to Republic (and in some cases also the appoint a disciplinary officer in Minister of Justice) to exercise influence disciplinary proceedings against Supreme over disciplinary proceedings against Court judges are part of the mechanism of Supreme Court judges by appointing a governmental checks and balances; disciplinary officer who will investigate the case, excluding the disciplinary officer of the Supreme Court from an on-going proceeding, risks to run counter to the principle of separation of powers and may affect judicial independence27; ______27 See Commission Reasoned Proposal of 20 December 2017, COM(2017) 835, para. 133. See also OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion on Certain Provisions of the Draft Act on the Supreme Court of Poland (as of 26 September 2017), 13 November 2017, p. 33.

Or. pl

Amendment 99 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution Amendment

18. Recalls that the CJEU found in its 18. Notes that the Polish authorities judgment of 24 June 201928that lowering have adopted an amendment to the act on the retirement age of sitting judges of the the Supreme Court in order to comply with Supreme Court is contrary to Union law the CJEU’s order, which is seen as

PE652.541v01-00 58/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN and breaches the principle of the evidence of the willingness of the Polish irremovability of judges and thus that of authorities to cooperate and engage in judicial independence, after it had earlier dialogue with the EU bodies, including in granted the Commission’s request for the reform of the judiciary following the interim measures on the matter by order CJEU ruling, although this area remains of 17 December 201829; notes that the an exclusive competence of the Member Polish authorities passed an amendment to States; the act on the Supreme Court in order to comply with the CJEU’s Order, the only instance so far in which they undid a reform of the justice system following a decision by the CJEU; ______28 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 June 2019, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:531. 29 Order of the Court of Justice of 17 December 2018, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18 R, ECLI:EU:C:2018:1021.

Or. pl

Amendment 100 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution Amendment

18. Recalls that the CJEU found in its 18. Recalls that the CJEU found in its judgment of 24 June 201928 that lowering judgment of 24 June 201928 that lowering the retirement age of sitting judges of the the retirement age of sitting judges of the Supreme Court is contrary to Union law Supreme Court is contrary to Union law and breaches the principle of the and breaches the principle of the irremovability of judges and thus that of irremovability of judges and thus that of judicial independence, after it had earlier judicial independence, after it had earlier granted the Commission’s request for granted the Commission’s request for interim measures on the matter by order of interim measures on the matter by order of 17 December 201829 ; notes that the Polish 17 December 201829 ; notes that the Polish authorities passed an amendment to the act authorities passed an amendment to the act on the Supreme Court in order to comply on the Supreme Court in order to comply with the CJEU’s Order, the only instance with the CJEU’s Order, the only instance so far in which they undid a reform of the so far in which they undid changes to the

AM\1206319EN.docx 59/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN justice system following a decision by the justice system following a decision by the CJEU; CJEU; ______28 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 28 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 June 2019, Commission v Poland, C- June 2019, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:531. 619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:531. 29 Order of the Court of Justice of 17 29 Order of the Court of Justice of 17 December 2018, Commission v Poland, C- December 2018, Commission v Poland, C- 619/18 R, ECLI:EU:C:2018:1021. 619/18 R, ECLI:EU:C:2018:1021.

Or. en

Amendment 101 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

19. Recalls that, in 2017, two new 19. Points out that the organisation chambers within the Supreme Court were and structure of the judicial system falls created, namely the Disciplinary Chamber under the sole responsibility of the and the Extraordinary Chamber, which Member States; were staffed with newly appointed judges selected by the new NCJ and entrusted with special powers – including the power of the Extraordinary Chamber to quash final judgments taken by lower courts or by the Supreme Court itself by way of extraordinary review, and the power of the Disciplinary Chamber to discipline other (Supreme Court) judges, creating de facto a “Supreme Court within the Supreme Court”;30 ; ______30 OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion of 13 November 2017, p. 7-20; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, para. 43; Recommendation (EU) 2018/103, para. 25; GRECO, Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 18-22 June 2018,

PE652.541v01-00 60/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN para. 31; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 8.

Or. pl

Amendment 102 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

19. Recalls that, in 2017, two new 19. Recalls that, in 2017, two new chambers within the Supreme Court were chambers within the Supreme Court were created, namely the Disciplinary Chamber created, namely the Disciplinary Chamber and the Extraordinary Chamber, which and the Extraordinary Chamber, which were staffed with newly appointed judges were staffed with newly appointed judges selected by the new NCJ and entrusted selected by the new NCJ and entrusted with special powers – including the power with special powers – including the power of the Extraordinary Chamber to quash of the Extraordinary Chamber to quash final judgments taken by lower courts or by final judgments taken by lower courts or by the Supreme Court itself by way of the Supreme Court itself by way of extraordinary review, and the power of the extraordinary review, and the power of the Disciplinary Chamber to discipline other Disciplinary Chamber to discipline other (Supreme Court) judges, creating de facto judges of the Supreme Court and of a “Supreme Court within the Supreme common courts, creating de facto a Court”;30 “Supreme Court within the Supreme Court”;30 ______30 OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion of 13 30 OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion of 13 November 2017, p. 7-20; Venice November 2017, p. 7-20; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, para. 43; Recommendation (EU) 2017, para. 43; Recommendation (EU) 2018/103, para. 25; GRECO, Addendum to 2018/103, para. 25; GRECO, Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report on the Fourth Round Evaluation Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 18-22 June 2018, para. Poland (Rule 34) of 18-22 June 2018, para. 31; Venice Commission and DGI of the 31; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 8. 16 January 2020, para. 8.

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 61/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 103 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

19. Recalls that, in 2017, two new 19. Recalls that, in 2018, two new chambers within the Supreme Court were chambers within the Supreme Court were created, namely the Disciplinary Chamber created, namely the Disciplinary Chamber and the Extraordinary Chamber, which and the Extraordinary Chamber, which were staffed with newly appointed judges were staffed with newly appointed judges selected by the new NCJ and entrusted selected by the new NCJ and entrusted with special powers – including the power with special powers – including the power of the Extraordinary Chamber to quash of the Extraordinary Chamber to quash final judgments taken by lower courts or by final judgments taken by lower courts or by the Supreme Court itself by way of the Supreme Court itself by way of extraordinary review, and the power of the extraordinary review, and the power of the Disciplinary Chamber to discipline other Disciplinary Chamber to discipline other (Supreme Court) judges, creating de facto a (Supreme Court) judges, creating de facto a “Supreme Court within the Supreme “Supreme Court within the Supreme Court”;30 Court”;30 ______30 OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion of 13 30 OSCE-ODIHR, Opinion of 13 November 2017, p. 7-20; Venice November 2017, p. 7-20; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, para. 43; Recommendation (EU) 2017, para. 43; Recommendation (EU) 2018/103, para. 25; GRECO, Addendum to 2018/103, para. 25; GRECO, Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report on the Fourth Round Evaluation Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 18-22 June 2018, para. Poland (Rule 34) of 18-22 June 2018, para. 31; Venice Commission and DGI of the 31; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 8. 16 January 2020, para. 8. (The new Act on Supreme Court was adopted in December 2017, however, from an organisational standpoint, both the new chambers were created and began to adjudicate at the end of 2018. The first nominations for judges in the newly- created chamber of the Supreme Court were delivered by President Duda on September 20th 2018 and October 10th 2018.)

PE652.541v01-00 62/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. en

Amendment 104 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution Amendment

20. Recalls that, in its ruling of 19 deleted November 2019,31the CJEU, answering a request for preliminary ruling by the Supreme Court (Chamber of Labour Law and Social Insurance, hereinafter the ‘Labour Chamber’) concerning the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court, ruled that national courts have a duty to disregard provisions of national law which reserve jurisdiction to hear a case where Union law may be applied to a body that does not meet the requirements of independence and impartiality; ______31 Judgment of the Court of Justice 19 November 2019, A.K. and Others v Sąd Najwyższy, C-585/18, C-624/18 and C- 625/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:982.

Or. pl

Amendment 105 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

21. Notes that the referring Supreme 21. Notes that the Court (Labour Chamber) subsequently Constitutional Tribunal judgment has

AM\1206319EN.docx 63/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN concluded in its judgment of 5 December clarified the controversy over the Supreme 2019 that the Disciplinary Chamber does Court Disciplinary Chamber and averted not fulfil the requirements of an the danger of judicial duality in Poland; independent and impartial tribunal, and that the Supreme Court (Civil, Criminal and Labour Chambers) adopted a resolution on 23 January 2020 reiterating that the Disciplinary Chamber is not a court due to its lack of independence and therefore its decisions shall be considered null and void; notes with grave concern that the Polish authorities have declared that those decisions are of no legal significance when it comes to the continuing functioning of the Disciplinary Chamber and the NCJ, and that the Constitutional Tribunal has ‘suspended’ the resolution of 23 January 2020, creating a dangerous judiciary duality in Poland and moreover openly defying the primacy of Union law and the status granted to the CJEU by Article 19(1) TEU32; ______32 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 38.

Or. pl

Amendment 106 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

21. Notes that the referring Supreme 21. Notes that the referring Supreme Court (Labour Chamber) subsequently Court (Labour Chamber) subsequently concluded in its judgment of 5 December concluded in its judgment of 5 December 2019 that the Disciplinary Chamber does 2019 that the Disciplinary Chamber does not fulfil the requirements of an not fulfil the requirements of an independent and impartial tribunal, and independent and impartial tribunal, and

PE652.541v01-00 64/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN that the Supreme Court (Civil, Criminal that the Supreme Court (Civil, Criminal and Labour Chambers) adopted a and Labour Chambers) adopted a resolution on 23 January 2020 reiterating resolution on 23 January 2020 reiterating that the Disciplinary Chamber is not a that the Disciplinary Chamber is not a court due to its lack of independence and court due to its lack of independence and therefore its decisions shall be considered therefore its decisions shall be considered null and void; notes with grave concern null and void; notes with grave concern that the Polish authorities have declared that the Polish authorities have declared that those decisions are of no legal that those decisions are of no legal significance when it comes to the significance when it comes to the continuing functioning of the Disciplinary continuing functioning of the Disciplinary Chamber and the NCJ, and that the Chamber and the NCJ, and that the Constitutional Tribunal has ‘suspended’ Constitutional Tribunal has ‘suspended’ the resolution of 23 January 2020, creating the resolution of 23 January 2020, creating a dangerous judiciary duality in Poland and a dangerous judiciary duality in Poland and moreover openly defying the primacy of moreover openly defying the primacy of Union law and the status granted to the Union law and the status granted to the CJEU by Article 19(1) TEU32 ; CJEU by Article 19(1) TEU in that it limits the effectiveness and application of the CJEU’s ruling of 19 November 201932 ; ______32 Venice Commission and DGI of the 32 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 38. 16 January 2020, para. 38.

Or. en

Amendment 107 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

22. Takes note of the order of the CJEU 22. Takes note of the order of the CJEU of 8 April 202033 instructing the Poland to of 8 April 202033 instructing Poland to immediately suspend the application of the immediately suspend the application of the national provisions on the powers of the national provisions on the powers of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and calls on the Polish authorities to Court and calls on the Polish authorities to swiftly implement the judgment; calls on swiftly implement the judgment; calls on the Commission to urgently start the Commission to submit an additional infringement proceedings in relation to the request seeking that payment of a fine be national provisions on the powers of the ordered as Poland has not complied in

AM\1206319EN.docx 65/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Extraordinary Chamber, since its full with the interim measures ordered; composition suffers from the same flaws as calls on the Commission to urgently start the Disciplinary Chamber; infringement proceedings in relation to the national provisions on the powers of the Extraordinary Chamber, since its composition suffers from the same flaws as the Disciplinary Chamber; ______33 Order of the Court of Justice of 8 April 33 Order of the Court of Justice of 8 April 2020, Commission v Poland, C-791/19 R, 2020, Commission v Poland, C-791/19 R, ECLI:EU:C:2020:277. ECLI:EU:C:2020:277.

Or. en

Amendment 108 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

22. Takes note of the order of the CJEU 22. Takes note of the order of the CJEU of 8 April 202033instructing the Poland to of 8 April 2020[1] instructing the Poland to immediately suspend the application of the immediately suspend the application of the national provisions on the powers of the national provisions on the powers of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and calls on the Polish authorities to Court; takes note of the information swiftly implement the judgment; calls on provided by the Polish authorities on the the Commission to urgently start timely implementation of the judgment infringement proceedings in relation to within the deadline in connection with the the national provisions on the powers of Order of the Acting First President of the the Extraordinary Chamber, since its Supreme Court No. 55/2020 on the composition suffers from the same flaws execution of the CJEU ruling; Order of as the Disciplinary Chamber; the Court of Justice of 8 April 2020, Commission v Poland, C-791/19 R, ECLI:EU:C:2020:277. ______33 Order of the Court of Justice of 8 April 2020, Commission v Poland, C-791/19 R, ECLI:EU:C:2020:277.

Or. pl

PE652.541v01-00 66/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 109 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution Amendment

23. Recalls that it is up to the Member 23. Recalls that it is up to the Member States to establish a council for the States to establish a council for the judiciary, but that, where such council is judiciary, and that its independence in established, its independence must be Poland is guaranteed in line with European guaranteed in line with European standards standards and the constitution; recognises and the constitution; recalls that, following that, following the reform of the NCJ, the the 2017-2018 reform of the NCJ, the body body responsible for safeguarding the responsible for safeguarding the independence of the judiciary and judges independence of the courts and judges in in accordance with Article 186(1) of the accordance with Article 186(1) of the Polish Constitution, the judicial community Polish Constitution, the judicial community in Poland did not lose its right to delegate in Poland lost the power to delegate representatives to the NCJ between 2017 representatives to the NCJ, and hence its and 2018, and thus is able to influence the influence on recruitment and promotion recruitment and promotion of judges; of judges; recalls that before the 2017 reform, 15 out of 25 members of the NCJ were judges elected by their peers, while since the 2017 reform, those judges are elected by the Polish Sejm; strongly regrets that, taken in conjunction with the immediate replacement in early 2018 of all the members appointed under the old rules, this measure led to a far-reaching politicisation of the NCJ34; ______34 Consultative Council of European Judges, Opinions of the Bureau of 7 April 2017 and 12 October 2017; OSCE/ODIHR, Final Opinion on Draft Amendments to the Act of the NCJ, 5 May 2017; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December 2017, p. 5-7; GRECO, Ad hoc Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 19-23 March 2018 and Addendum of 18-22 June 2018; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint

AM\1206319EN.docx 67/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 42 and 61.

Or. pl

Amendment 110 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution Amendment

23. Recalls that it is up to the Member 23. Recalls that it is up to the Member States to establish a council for the States to establish a council for the judiciary, but that, where such council is judiciary, but that, where such council is established, its independence must be established, its independence must be guaranteed in line with European standards guaranteed in line with European standards and the constitution; recalls that, following and the constitution; recalls that, following the 2017-2018 reform of the NCJ, the body the 2017-2018 reform of the NCJ, the body responsible for safeguarding the responsible for safeguarding the independence of the courts and judges in independence of the courts and judges in accordance with Article 186(1) of the accordance with Article 186(1) of the Polish Constitution, the judicial community Polish Constitution, the judicial community in Poland lost the power to delegate in Poland lost the power to delegate representatives to the NCJ, and hence its representatives to the NCJ, and hence its influence on recruitment and promotion of influence on recruitment and promotion of judges; recalls that before the 2017 reform, judges; recalls that before the 2017 reform, 15 out of 25 members of the NCJ were 15 out of 25 members of the NCJ were judges elected by their peers, while since judges elected by their peers, while since the 2017 reform, those judges are elected the 2017 reform, those judges are elected by the Polish Sejm; strongly regrets that, by the Polish Sejm; strongly regrets that, taken in conjunction with the immediate taken in conjunction with the premature replacement in early 2018 of all the termination in early 2018 of the mandates members appointed under the old rules, of all the members appointed under the old this measure led to a far-reaching rules, this measure led to a far-reaching politicisation of the NCJ34 ; politicisation of the NCJ34 ; ______34 Consultative Council of European 34 Consultative Council of European Judges, Opinions of the Bureau of 7 April Judges, Opinions of the Bureau of 7 April 2017 and 12 October 2017; OSCE/ODIHR, 2017 and 12 October 2017; OSCE/ODIHR, Final Opinion on Draft Amendments to the Final Opinion on Draft Amendments to the Act of the NCJ, 5 May 2017; Venice Act of the NCJ, 5 May 2017; Venice Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December Commission, Opinion of 8-9 December

PE652.541v01-00 68/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 2017, p. 5-7; GRECO, Ad hoc Report on 2017, p. 5-7; GRECO, Ad hoc Report on Poland (Rule 34) of 19-23 March 2018 and Poland (Rule 34) of 19-23 March 2018 and Addendum of 18-22 June 2018; Venice Addendum of 18-22 June 2018; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 42 and 61. January 2020, paras 42 and 61.

Or. en

Amendment 111 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution Amendment

24. Recalls that the Supreme Court deleted (Labour Chamber), implementing the criteria set out by the CJEU in its judgment of 19 November 2019, found in its judgment of 5 December 2019 and in its decisions of 15 January 2020 that the decisive role of the new NCJ in the selection of the judges of the newly created Disciplinary Chamber undermines the latter’s independence and impartiality;

Or. pl

Amendment 112 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution Amendment

24. Recalls that the Supreme Court 24. Recalls that the Supreme Court (Labour Chamber), implementing the (Labour Chamber), implementing the

AM\1206319EN.docx 69/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN criteria set out by the CJEU in its judgment criteria set out by the CJEU in its judgment of 19 November 2019, found in its of 19 November 2019, found in its judgment of 5 December 2019 and in its judgment of 5 December 2019 and in its decisions of 15 January 2020 that the decisions of 15 and 23 January 2020 that decisive role of the new NCJ in the the decisive role of the new NCJ in the selection of the judges of the newly created selection of the judges of the newly created Disciplinary Chamber undermines the Disciplinary Chamber undermines the latter’s independence and impartiality; latter’s independence and impartiality; is concerned about the legal status of the judges appointed or promoted by the NCJ in its current composition and about the impact their participation in adjudicating may have on the validity and legality of proceedings;

Or. en

Amendment 113 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution Amendment

25. Recalls that the European deleted Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) suspended the new NCJ on 17 September 2018 for reason of no longer fulfilling the requirements of being independent of the executive and legislature and is now considering expelling the new NCJ entirely35; ______35 ENCJ, Letter of 21 February 2020 by the ENCJ Executive Board. See as well the letter of 4 May 2020 by the European Association of Judges in support of the ENCJ.

Or. pl

PE652.541v01-00 70/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 114 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution Amendment

25. Recalls that the European Network 25. Recalls that the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) suspended the new NCJ on 17 September suspended the new NCJ on 17 September 2018 for reason of no longer fulfilling the 2018 for reason of no longer fulfilling the requirements of being independent of the requirements of being independent of the executive and legislature and is now executive and legislature and has initiated considering expelling the new NCJ the expulsion procedure in April 202035; entirely35 ; ______35 ENCJ, Letter of 21 February 2020 by the 35 ENCJ, Letter of 21 February 2020 by the ENCJ Executive Board. See as well the ENCJ Executive Board. See as well the letter of 4 May 2020 by the European letter of 4 May 2020 by the European Association of Judges in support of the Association of Judges in support of the ENCJ. ENCJ.

Or. en

Amendment 115 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution Amendment

26. Calls on the Commission to start deleted infringement proceedings against the act of 12 May 2011 on the NCJ and to ask the CJEU to suspend the activities of the new NCJ by way of interim measures;

Or. en

Amendment 116

AM\1206319EN.docx 71/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution Amendment

26. Calls on the Commission to start 26. Calls on the Commission to start infringement proceedings against the act of infringement proceedings against the act of 12 May 2011 on the NCJ and to ask the 12 May 2011 on the NCJ as amended in CJEU to suspend the activities of the new 2017 and to ask the CJEU to suspend the NCJ by way of interim measures; activities of the new NCJ by way of interim measures;

Or. en

Amendment 117 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution Amendment

26. Calls on the Commission to start 26. Does not see sufficient grounds to infringement proceedings against the act of call on the Commission to start 12 May 2011 on the NCJ and to ask the infringement proceedings against the act of CJEU to suspend the activities of the new 12 May 2011 on the NCJ and to ask the NCJ by way of interim measures; CJEU to suspend the activities of the new NCJ by way of interim measures;

Or. pl

Amendment 118 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26

PE652.541v01-00 72/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

26. Calls on the Commission to start 26. Calls on the Commission to start infringement proceedings against the act of infringement proceedings against the act of 12 May 2011 on the NCJ and to ask the 8 December 2017 on the NCJ and to ask CJEU to suspend the activities of the new the CJEU to suspend the activities of the NCJ by way of interim measures; new NCJ by way of interim measures;

Or. en

Amendment 119 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Tomas Tobé, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Subheading 11

Motion for a resolution Amendment

The rules governing the organisation of the The rules governing the organisation of the ordinary courts and the appointment of ordinary courts, the appointment of courts courts presidents presidents and the retirement regime for judges of the ordinary courts

Or. en

Amendment 120 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27

Motion for a resolution Amendment

27. Regrets that the Minister of Justice, 27. Recognises that the Minister of who is, in the Polish system, also the Justice, who in the Polish system is also the Prosecutor General, obtained the power to Prosecutor General, in accordance with appoint and dismiss court presidents of the principle of Member States’ the lower courts at his discretion during a sovereignty over the organisation of the transitional period of six months, and that judiciary, has been given the power to in 2017-2018 the Minister of Justice appoint and dismiss court presidents of the replaced over a hundred court presidents lower courts, as is the case in many other and vice-presidents; notes that, after this Member States; recognises that the

AM\1206319EN.docx 73/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN period, removal of court presidents Minister of Justice in Poland, as in other remained in the hands of the Minister of Member States, has “disciplinary” powers Justice, with virtually no effective checks over court presidents and presidents of attached to this power; notes, higher courts, who in turn have furthermore, that the Minister of Justice administrative powers over presidents of also obtained other “disciplinary” powers lower courts; vis-à-vis court presidents, and presidents of higher courts, who in turn, now have large administrative powers vis-à-vis presidents of lower courts36; regrets this major setback for the rule of law and judicial independence in Poland37; ______36 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 45. 37 See also Council of Europe, Bureau of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE-BU), CCJE- BU(2018)6REV, 18 June 2018.

Or. pl

Amendment 121 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27

Motion for a resolution Amendment

27. Regrets that the Minister of Justice, 27. Regrets that the Minister of Justice, who is, in the Polish system, also the who is, in the Polish system, also the Prosecutor General, obtained the power to Prosecutor General, obtained the power to appoint and dismiss court presidents of the appoint and dismiss court presidents of the lower courts at his discretion during a lower courts at his discretion during a transitional period of six months, and that transitional period of six months, and that in 2017-2018 the Minister of Justice in 2017-2018 the Minister of Justice replaced over a hundred court presidents replaced over one hundred and fifty court and vice-presidents; notes that, after this presidents and vice-presidents; notes that, period, removal of court presidents after this period, removal of court remained in the hands of the Minister of presidents remained in the hands of the Justice, with virtually no effective checks Minister of Justice, with virtually no attached to this power; notes, furthermore, effective checks attached to this power; that the Minister of Justice also obtained notes, furthermore, that the Minister of

PE652.541v01-00 74/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN other “disciplinary” powers vis-à-vis court Justice also obtained other “disciplinary” presidents, and presidents of higher courts, powers vis-à-vis court presidents, and who in turn, now have large administrative presidents of higher courts, who in turn, powers vis-à-vis presidents of lower now have large administrative powers vis- courts36 ; regrets this major setback for the à-vis presidents of lower courts36 ; regrets rule of law and judicial independence in this major setback for the rule of law and Poland37 ; judicial independence in Poland37 ; ______36 Venice Commission and DGI of the 36 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para. 45. 16 January 2020, para. 45. 37 See also Council of Europe, Bureau of 37 See also Council of Europe, Bureau of the Consultative Council of European the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE-BU), CCJE- Judges (CCJE-BU), CCJE- BU(2018)6REV, 18 June 2018. BU(2018)6REV, 18 June 2018. (The total number of Presidents and Vice- Presidents of the courts who have been expelled on the basis of the provisions cited is 158 - according to data officially provided by the Ministry of Justice upon the request by the Polish Judges’ Association ‘Iustitia’.)

Or. en

Amendment 122 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28

Motion for a resolution Amendment

28. Regrets that the act of 20 December 28. Recognises that the Polish 2019 amending the act on the common authorities, by way of the act of 20 courts and certain other acts that entered December 2019 amending the act on the into force on 14 February 2020 changed common courts and certain other acts that the composition of the assemblies of entered into force on 14 February 2020, judges and moved some of the powers of were able, in accordance with the those bodies of judicial self-government to principle of the sovereignty of Member the colleges of courts presidents appointed States in terms of the organisation of the by the Minister of Justice38; judiciary, to change the composition of the assemblies of judges and move some of the

AM\1206319EN.docx 75/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN powers of those bodies of judicial self- government to the colleges of courts presidents appointed by the Minister of Justice; ______38 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 46 to 50.

Or. pl

Amendment 123 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

28a. Recalls that the CJEU found in its judgement of 5 November 201938a that the provisions of the Polish law amending the law on the organisation of the ordinary courts, which lowered the retirement age of judges of the ordinary courts, whilst allowing the Minister of Justice to decide on the prolongation of their active service, and which set a different retirement age depending on their gender, are contrary to Union law; ______38a Judgment of the Court of Justice of 5 November 2019, Commission v Poland, C- 192/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:924.

Or. en

Amendment 124 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

PE652.541v01-00 76/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29

Motion for a resolution Amendment

29. Denounces the new provisions 29. Acknowledges the relevance of introducing further disciplinary offences new legislation prohibiting all political and sanctions in respect of judges and activities of judges, obliging them to court presidents, as they pose serious risk disclose publicly their membership in to judicial independence39; denounces the associations and restricting substantively new provisions prohibiting any political the deliberations of judicial self-governing activity of judges, obliging judges to bodies, in order to strengthen the effective disclose publicly their membership in separation of powers and ensure the associations and restricting substantively functioning of apolitical and impartial the deliberations of judicial self-governing courts; bodies, which go beyond the principles of legal certainty, necessity and proportionality in restricting the judges’ freedom of expression40; ______39 OSCE/ODIHR, Urgent Interim Opinion on the Bill Amending the Act on the Organization of Common Courts, the Act on the Supreme Court and Certain Other Acts of Poland (as of 20 December 2019), 14 January 2020, p. 23-26; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 44-45. 40 OSCE/ODIHR, Urgent Interim Opinion, 14 January 2020, p. 18-21; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 24-30;

Or. pl

Amendment 125 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new)

AM\1206319EN.docx 77/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

29a. Deplores the abuse of disciplinary proceedings against judges and prosecutors in Poland; is deeply concerned by the motion filed by the National Prosecution Office to the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court to waive the immunity of Judge Igor Tuleya; is similarly concerned by the disciplinary proceedings initiated against other judges, including Krystian Markiewicz, Chairperson of the Polish Judges’ Association “Iustitia”, and Paweł Juszczyszyn; calls on Polish authorities to stop using disciplinary proceedings to disguise politically motivated reprisals against specific judges and prosecutors for applying EU law or their public defence of the rule of law in Poland;

Or. en

Amendment 126 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

29a. Expresses concern regarding the disciplinary proceedings initiated against common court judges in reference to their judicial decisions or public statements in defence of judicial independence;

Or. en

Amendment 127 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

PE652.541v01-00 78/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution Amendment

30. Calls on the Polish authorities to 30. Recognises, in the light of the remove the new provisions (on explanations provided by the Polish disciplinary offences and other) that authorities aimed at ensuring the prevent the courts from examining functioning of a judicial system questions of independence and characterised by stability and integrity, impartiality of other judges from the the legitimacy of introducing provisions standpoint of Union law and the that prevent the courts from examining European Convention for the Protection questions of independence and of Human Rights and Fundamental impartiality of other judges; Freedoms (ECHR), hence depriving judges from exercising their duties under Union law to put aside national provisions conflicting with Union law41; ______41 OSCE/ODIHR, Urgent Interim Opinion, 14 January 2020, p. 13-17; Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, paras 31-43.

Or. pl

Amendment 128 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31

Motion for a resolution Amendment

31. Welcomes the Commission’s deleted initiation of infringement proceedings in relation to the aforementioned new provisions; calls on the Commission to request the CJEU to use the expedited procedure and to grant interim measures, when it comes to a referral of the case to the CJEU;

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 79/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 129 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31

Motion for a resolution Amendment

31. Welcomes the Commission’s 31. Does not see, in the light of the initiation of infringement proceedings in explanations provided by the Polish relation to the aforementioned new authorities and the findings of the present provisions; calls on the Commission to proceedings, any grounds for the request the CJEU to use the expedited Commission to initiate infringement procedure and to grant interim measures, proceedings in relation to the when it comes to a referral of the case to aforementioned new provisions; calls on the CJEU; the Commission to request the CJEU to use the expedited procedure and to grant interim measures, when it comes to a referral of the case to the CJEU;

Or. pl

Amendment 130 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

31a. Condemns the smear campaign against the Polish judges and involvement of public officials therein; calls on the Polish authorities to refrain from activities undermining the authority of the judiciary;

Or. en

Amendment 131 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

PE652.541v01-00 80/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32

Motion for a resolution Amendment

32. Denounces the merger of the office 32. Recognises that the merger of the of the Minister of Justice and that of the office of the Minister of Justice and that of Public Prosecutor General, the increased the Public Prosecutor General, the powers of the Public Prosecutor General increased powers of the Public Prosecutor vis-à-vis the prosecution system, the General vis-à-vis the prosecution system, increased powers of the Minister of Justice and the increased powers of the Minister of in respect of the judiciary (act of 27 July Justice in respect of the judiciary (act of 27 2001 on the organisation of common July 2001 on the organisation of common courts) and the weak position of checks to courts) fall under the sole competence of these powers (National Council of Public the Member States as regards the Prosecutors), which result in the organisation and structure of the accumulation of too many powers for one judiciary: person and have direct negative consequences for the independence of the prosecutorial system from the political sphere, as stated by the Venice Commission42; ______42 Venice Commission Opinion of 8-9 December 2017 on the Act on the Public Prosecutor’s office, as amended, CDL- AD(2017)028, para. 115.

Or. pl

Amendment 132 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

32a. Recalls that the CJEU found in its judgement of 5 November 201943a that lowering the retirement age of public prosecutors is contrary to Union law

AM\1206319EN.docx 81/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN because it establishes a different retirement age for men and women who are public prosecutors in Poland; ______43a Judgment of the Court of Justice of 5 November 2019, Commission v Poland, C- 192/18 ECLI:EU:C:2019:924.

Or. en

Amendment 133 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33

Motion for a resolution Amendment

33. Concurs with the Commission, the 33. Concurs with the Commission, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Group of States against Europe, the Group of States against Corruption that the aforementioned Corruption and the United Nations Special separate reforms to the judicial system, Rapporteur on the independence of judges considering their interaction and overall and lawyers that the aforementioned impact, amount to a serious, sustained and separate changes to the judicial system, systemic breach of the rule of law, considering their interaction and overall enabling the legislative and executive impact, amount to a serious, sustained and powers to influence the functioning of the systemic breach of the rule of law, judiciary in a critical manner, thereby enabling the legislative and executive significantly weakening the independence powers to influence the functioning of the of the judiciary in Poland43 ; judiciary in a critical manner, thereby significantly weakening the independence of the judiciary in Poland43; condemns the destabilizing impact on the Polish legal order of the measures taken and appointments made since 2016; ______43 Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; 43 Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; GRECO, Follow-up to the Addendum to United Nations, Special Rapporteur on the Fourth Round Evaluation Report (rule the independence of judges and lawyers, 34) – Poland, 6 December 2019, para. 65; Statement of 25 June 2018; GRECO, PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 Follow-up to the Addendum to the Fourth January 2020 on the functioning of Round Evaluation Report (rule 34) –

PE652.541v01-00 82/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN democratic institutions in Poland, para. 4. Poland, 6 December 2019, para. 65; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 4.

Or. en

Amendment 134 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33

Motion for a resolution Amendment

33. Concurs with the Commission, the 33. Recalls that at this stage of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of procedure it is for the Council to Europe and the Group of States against determine whether the aforementioned Corruption that the aforementioned separate reforms to the judicial system separate reforms to the judicial system, amount to a clear risk of a serious breach considering their interaction and overall of the rule of law in Poland; impact, amount to a serious, sustained and systemic breach of the rule of law, enabling the legislative and executive powers to influence the functioning of the judiciary in a critical manner, thereby significantly weakening the independence of the judiciary in Poland43 ; ______43 Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; GRECO, Follow-up to the Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report (rule 34) – Poland, 6 December 2019, para. 65; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 4.

Or. en

Amendment 135 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

AM\1206319EN.docx 83/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33

Motion for a resolution Amendment

33. Concurs with the Commission, the 33. In the light of the explanations Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of provided by the Polish authorities and the Europe and the Group of States against findings made in the course of this Corruption that the aforementioned procedure, the above-mentioned separate reforms to the judicial system, reforms to the judicial system, given their considering their interaction and overall rationale and purpose, do not constitute a impact, amount to a serious, sustained and serious, persistent and systemic breach of systemic breach of the rule of law, the rule of law and make it possible to enabling the legislative and executive strengthen the principle of checks and powers to influence the functioning of the balances between the legislative, executive judiciary in a critical manner, thereby and judicial authorities by jointly shaping significantly weakening the independence the judicial system in Poland; of the judiciary in Poland43; ______43 Recommendation (EU) 2018/103; GRECO, Follow-up to the Addendum to the Fourth Round Evaluation Report (rule 34) – Poland, 6 December 2019, para. 65; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 4.

Or. pl

Amendment 136 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 15

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Protection of fundamental rights, deleted including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, in Poland

Or. pl

PE652.541v01-00 84/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 137 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 16

Motion for a resolution Amendment

The right to a fair trial deleted

Or. pl

Amendment 138 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34

Motion for a resolution Amendment

34. Is concerned about reports deleted alleging undue delays in court proceedings, difficulties in accessing legal assistance during arrest, and instances of insufficient respect for the confidentiality of communication between counsel and client44; ______44 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, para. 33.

Or. pl

Amendment 139 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

AM\1206319EN.docx 85/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34

Motion for a resolution Amendment

34. Is concerned about reports alleging 34. Is concerned about reports alleging undue delays in court proceedings, undue delays in court proceedings, difficulties in accessing legal assistance difficulties in accessing legal assistance during arrest, and instances of insufficient during arrest, and instances of insufficient respect for the confidentiality of respect for the confidentiality of communication between counsel and communication between counsel and client44 ; client44; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the situation of lawyers in Poland; reminds of the right of all citizens to being advised, defended and represented by an independent lawyer according to Article 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; ______44 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), 44 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, para. 33. 2016, para. 33.

Or. en

Amendment 140 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34

Motion for a resolution Amendment

34. Is concerned about reports alleging 34. Takes note of reports alleging undue delays in court proceedings, undue delays in court proceedings, difficulties in accessing legal assistance difficulties in accessing legal assistance during arrest, and instances of insufficient during arrest, and instances of insufficient respect for the confidentiality of respect for the confidentiality of communication between counsel and communication between counsel and client44 ; client44 ; ______44 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), 44 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November periodic report of Poland, 23 November

PE652.541v01-00 86/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 2016, para. 33. 2016, para. 33.

Or. en

Amendment 141 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35

Motion for a resolution Amendment

35. Is concerned that, since the entry deleted into force on 14 February 2020 of the amendments to the act on the Supreme Court, only the Extraordinary Chamber can decide whether a judge or tribunal or court is independent and impartial, hence depriving citizens of an important element of judicial review at all other instances45; ______45 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para 59.

Or. pl

Amendment 142 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35

Motion for a resolution Amendment

35. Is concerned that, since the entry 35. Is concerned that, since the entry into force on 14 February 2020 of the into force on 14 February 2020 of the amendments to the act on the Supreme amendments to the act on the Supreme Court, only the Extraordinary Chamber can Court, only the Extraordinary Chamber, decide whether a judge or tribunal or court whose independence and impartiality

AM\1206319EN.docx 87/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN is independent and impartial, hence itself is in question, can decide whether a depriving citizens of an important element judge or tribunal or court is independent of judicial review at all other instances45 ; and impartial, hence depriving citizens of an important element of judicial review at all other instances45; recalls that according to the case law of the Court of Justice, the right to a fair trial obliges every court to check of its own motion whether it fulfils the criteria of independence and impartiality; 45a ______45 Venice Commission and DGI of the 45 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para 59. 16 January 2020, para 59. 45a Judgment of the Court of Justice of 26 March 2020, Simpson v Council and HG v Commission, Joined Cases C-542/18 RX-II and C-543/18 RX-II, ECLI:EU:C:2020:232, para 57.

Or. en

Amendment 143 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35

Motion for a resolution Amendment

35. Is concerned that, since the entry 35. Notes that, since the entry into into force on 14 February 2020 of the force on 14 February 2020 of the amendments to the act on the Supreme amendments to the act on the Supreme Court, only the Extraordinary Chamber can Court, only the Extraordinary Chamber can decide whether a judge or tribunal or court decide whether a judge or tribunal or court is independent and impartial, hence is independent and impartial; depriving citizens of an important element of judicial review at all other instances45 ; ______45 Venice Commission and DGI of the Council of Europe, Urgent Joint Opinion of 16 January 2020, para 59.

Or. en

PE652.541v01-00 88/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 144 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

35a. Calls on the Polish authorities to implement fully the judgments handed down by the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving the CIA secret prisons in Poland;

Or. en

Amendment 145 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 17

Motion for a resolution Amendment

The right to information and freedom of deleted expression, including academic freedom

Or. pl

Amendment 146 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Subheading 17

Motion for a resolution Amendment

The right to information and freedom of Freedom and pluralism of the media expression, including academic freedom

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 89/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 147 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Subheading 17

Motion for a resolution Amendment

The right to information and freedom of The right to information and freedom of expression, including academic freedom expression

Or. en

Amendment 148 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

35a. Reiterates that media freedom and pluralism is inseparable from democracy and the rule of law and that the right to inform and the right to be informed are part of the core basic democratic values on which European Union is founded;

Or. en

Amendment 149 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36

Motion for a resolution Amendment

36. Recalls that in its resolution of 14 deleted September 2016, Parliament has expressed its concern about already adopted and newly suggested changes to

PE652.541v01-00 90/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Polish media law; repeats its call on the Commission to carry out an assessment of the legislation adopted as regards its compatibility with Union Law, in particular, regarding the legislation on public media;

Or. pl

Amendment 150 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Domènec Ruiz Devesa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36

Motion for a resolution Amendment

36. Recalls that in its resolution of 14 36. Recalls that in its resolution of 14 September 2016, Parliament has expressed September 2016, Parliament has expressed its concern about already adopted and its concern about already adopted and newly suggested changes to Polish media newly suggested changes to Polish media law; repeats its call on the Commission to law; repeats its call on the Commission to carry out an assessment of the legislation carry out an assessment of the legislation adopted as regards its compatibility with adopted as regards its compatibility with Union Law, in particular, regarding the Union Law, in particular with Article 11 of legislation on public media; the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Union legislation on public media;

Or. en

Amendment 151 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Domènec Ruiz Devesa, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

36a. Recalls that, in its resolution of 16

AM\1206319EN.docx 91/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN January 2020, Parliament has called on the Council to address in the hearings under Article 7(1) of the TEU any new developments in the field of freedom of expression, including media freedom; condemns cases of censoring content by the public broadcasters in Poland;

Or. en

Amendment 152 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37

Motion for a resolution Amendment

37. Is deeply concerned by the deleted excessive use of libel cases by some politicians against journalists, including by sentencing with criminal fines and suspension from exercising the profession of journalist; fears for a chilling effect on the profession and independence of journalists and media46; ______46 Council of Europe Platform to Promote the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists, 2020 Annual Report, March 2020, p. 42.

Or. pl

Amendment 153 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE652.541v01-00 92/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 37. Is deeply concerned by the 37. Is deeply concerned by the excessive use of libel cases by some excessive use of libel cases by some politicians against journalists, including by politicians against journalists, including by sentencing with criminal fines and sentencing with criminal fines and suspension from exercising the profession suspension from exercising the profession of journalist; fears for a chilling effect on of journalist; fears for a chilling effect on the profession and independence of the profession and independence of journalists and media46 ; journalists and media46 ; calls on the Polish authorities to set up an independent and impartial regulatory body, in cooperation with journalists’ organisations, for monitoring, documenting and reporting on attacks against journalists as well as on lawsuits intended to silence or intimidate independent media and to guarantee access to the appropriate legal remedies; calls on the Polish authorities to fully implement Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2016)4 on the protection of journalism and safety of journalists and other media actors; ______46 Council of Europe Platform to Promote 46 Council of Europe Platform to Promote the Protection of Journalism and Safety of the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists, 2020 Annual Report, March Journalists, 2020 Annual Report, March 2020, p. 42. 2020, p. 42.

Or. en

Amendment 154 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37

Motion for a resolution Amendment

37. Is deeply concerned by the 37. Is deeply concerned by the excessive use of libel cases by some excessive use of libel cases by some politicians against journalists, including by politicians against journalists, including by sentencing with criminal fines and sentencing with criminal fines and suspension from exercising the profession suspension from exercising the profession of journalist; fears for a chilling effect on of journalist; fears for a chilling effect on the profession and independence of the profession and independence of

AM\1206319EN.docx 93/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN journalists and media46 ; journalists and media46 ; calls on the Commission to propose an Anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) Directive that will protect the media from vexatious lawsuits in the Union that are intended to silence, intimidate or bankrupt them; ______46 Council of Europe Platform to Promote 46 Council of Europe Platform to Promote the Protection of Journalism and Safety of the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists, 2020 Annual Report, March Journalists, 2020 Annual Report, March 2020, p. 42. 2020, p. 42.

Or. en

Amendment 155 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

37a. Expresses concern over use and threat of libel litigation against academics and the Polish Ombudsman; calls on Polish authorities to respect freedom of speech and academic freedom; denounces attempts to silence the Polish Ombudsman, an independent institution enshrined in the Polish Constitution;

Or. en

Amendment 156 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Tomas Tobé, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 a (new)

PE652.541v01-00 94/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

37a. Is concerned about reported cases of detention of journalists for doing their job when reporting on anti-lockdown protests;

Or. en

Amendment 157 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

37b. Is concerned by the actions carried out by the Polish authorities in recent years, including a re-shaping of the public broadcaster into a pro-government broadcaster, hindering public media and their governing bodies of independent or dissenting voices and exercising control over the broadcasting content, the latest example involving the Polish public Radio Three (known as Troika), which was accused of censoring an anti-government song that topped the charts, with the internet links and news about the song disabled on the station’s website shortly after the chart show was broadcast; notes with regret that since 2015 Poland has fallen in the World Press Freedom Index from 18th to 62nd place; recalls that Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights states that the freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected; recalls that Article 54 of the Polish Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and forbids censorship;

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 95/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 158 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

38. Calls on the Polish parliament to deleted repeal Chapter 6c of the act of 18 December 1998 on the Institute of National Remembrance – Committee for the Prosecution of the Crimes against the Polish Nation, which jeopardises freedom of speech and independent research by rendering it a civil offense that is actionable before civil courts to cause harm to the reputation of Poland and its people, such as by making any accusation of complicity of Poland or Poles in the Holocaust47; ______47 See as well the Statement of 28 June 2018 by the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media.

Or. pl

Amendment 159 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

38. Calls on the Polish parliament to deleted repeal Chapter 6c of the act of 18 December 1998 on the Institute of National Remembrance – Committee for the Prosecution of the Crimes against the Polish Nation, which jeopardises freedom of speech and independent research by rendering it a civil offense that is

PE652.541v01-00 96/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN actionable before civil courts to cause harm to the reputation of Poland and its people, such as by making any accusation of complicity of Poland or Poles in the Holocaust47; ______47 See as well the Statement of 28 June 2018 by the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media.

Or. pl

Amendment 160 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

38. Calls on the Polish parliament to deleted repeal Chapter 6c of the act of 18 December 1998 on the Institute of National Remembrance – Committee for the Prosecution of the Crimes against the Polish Nation, which jeopardises freedom of speech and independent research by rendering it a civil offense that is actionable before civil courts to cause harm to the reputation of Poland and its people, such as by making any accusation of complicity of Poland or Poles in the Holocaust47 ; ______47 See as well the Statement of 28 June 2018 by the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media.

Or. en

Amendment 161 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

AM\1206319EN.docx 97/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 18

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Freedom of assembly deleted

Or. pl

Amendment 162 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

39. Reiterates its call on the Polish deleted government to respect the right of freedom of assembly by removing from the current act of 24 July 2015 on public assemblies, as amended on 13 December 2016, the provisions prioritising government-approved ‘cyclical’ assemblies48; urges the authorities to refrain from applying criminal sanctions to people who participate in peaceful assemblies or counter-demonstrations and to drop criminal charges against peaceful protesters; ______48 See as well the Communication of 23 April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talks.

Or. pl

Amendment 163 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo,

PE652.541v01-00 98/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

39. Reiterates its call on the Polish 39. Reiterates its call on the Polish government to respect the right of freedom government to respect the right of freedom of assembly by removing from the current of assembly by removing from the current act of 24 July 2015 on public assemblies, act of 24 July 2015 on public assemblies, as amended on 13 December 2016, the as amended on 13 December 2016, the provisions prioritising government- provisions prioritising government- approved ‘cyclical’ assemblies48 ; urges the approved ‘cyclical’ assemblies48 ; urges the authorities to refrain from applying authorities to refrain from applying criminal sanctions to people who criminal sanctions to people who participate in peaceful assemblies or participate in peaceful assemblies or counter-demonstrations and to drop counter-demonstrations and to drop criminal charges against peaceful criminal charges against peaceful protesters; protesters; urges the authorities moreover to adequately protect peaceful assemblies; is concerned about the current ban on public assemblies without the introduction of a state of natural disaster due to the COVID-19 pandemic and insists on the need to apply the principle of proportionality when restricting the right to assembly during the COVID-19 crisis; ______48 See as well the Communication of 23 48 See as well the Communication of 23 April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at to ensure free and full participation at climate talks. climate talks.

Or. en

Amendment 164 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

39. Reiterates its call on the Polish 39. Reiterates its call on the Polish

AM\1206319EN.docx 99/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN government to respect the right of freedom government to respect the right of freedom of assembly by removing from the current of assembly by removing from the current act of 24 July 2015 on public assemblies, act of 24 July 2015 on public assemblies, as amended on 13 December 2016, the as amended on 13 December 2016, the provisions prioritising government- provisions prioritising government- approved ‘cyclical’ assemblies48 ; urges the approved ‘cyclical’ assemblies48 ; urges the authorities to refrain from applying authorities to refrain from applying criminal sanctions to people who criminal sanctions to people who participate in peaceful assemblies or participate in peaceful assemblies or counter-demonstrations and to drop counter-demonstrations and to drop criminal charges against peaceful criminal charges against peaceful protesters; protesters; urge the authorities to adequately protect peaceful assemblies and bring to justice those who violently attack people participating in peaceful assemblies; ______48 See as well the Communication of 23 48 See as well the Communication of 23 April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at to ensure free and full participation at climate talks. climate talks.

Or. en

Amendment 165 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

39. Reiterates its call on the Polish 39. Recalls that on 2 April 2017, an government to respect the right of amendment to the act on public freedom of assembly by removing from assemblies came into force, with Article the current act of 24 July 2015 on public 12(1) of the act being amended through assemblies, as amended on 13 December the introduction of a rule stipulating that 2016, the provisions prioritising different assemblies may not be held government-approved ‘cyclical’ within 100 metres of each other, thus the assemblies48; urges the authorities to amendment reduces the likelihood of refrain from applying criminal sanctions threat to the safety of participants in to people who participate in peaceful concurrent assemblies by increasing the assemblies or counter-demonstrations and distance between them, while their to drop criminal charges against peaceful participants are able to express their protesters; opinions; recalls that persons or organisations have the right to

PE652.541v01-00 100/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN organise assemblies once the formal requirements set out in the act of 24 July 2015 have been met. ______48 See as well the Communication of 23 April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talks.

Or. pl

Amendment 166 Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Patryk Jaki, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

39. Reiterates its call on the Polish 39. Recalls that persons or government to respect the right of organisations shall have the right to freedom of assembly by removing from organise assemblies after meeting the the current act of 24 July 2015 on public formal requirements set out in the act of assemblies, as amended on 13 December 24 July 2015, and that police officers shall 2016, the provisions prioritising take action only against persons who government-approved ‘cyclical’ violate the prevailing legal order, first of assemblies48; urges the authorities to all by trying to separate them from refrain from applying criminal sanctions participants in the assembly who are to people who participate in peaceful peacefully demonstrating their views; assemblies or counter-demonstrations and recalls, furthermore, that the to drop criminal charges against peaceful Constitutional Tribunal has pointed out protesters; that the introduction of the institution of cyclical assemblies is an additional and new way of defining the legal framework for the exercise of freedom of assembly; ______48 See as well the Communication of 23 April 2018 by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talks.

Or. pl

AM\1206319EN.docx 101/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 167 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Freedom of association deleted

Or. pl

Amendment 168 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40

Motion for a resolution Amendment

40. Calls on the Polish authorities to deleted modify the act of 15 September 2017 on the National Institute for Freedom - Centre for the Development of Civil Society49, in order to ensure access to state funding for critical civil society groups, and a fair, impartial and transparent distribution of public funds to civil society, ensuring pluralistic representation; ______49 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the Draft Act of Poland on the National Freedom Institute - Centre for the Development of Civil Society, Warsaw, 22 August 2017.

Or. pl

Amendment 169 Terry Reintke

PE652.541v01-00 102/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40

Motion for a resolution Amendment

40. Calls on the Polish authorities to 40. Calls on the Polish authorities to modify the act of 15 September 2017 on modify the act of 15 September 2017 on the National Institute for Freedom - Centre the National Institute for Freedom - Centre for the Development of Civil Society49 , in for the Development of Civil Society49 , in order to ensure access to state funding for order to ensure access to state funding for critical civil society groups, and a fair, critical civil society groups, and a fair, impartial and transparent distribution of impartial and transparent distribution of public funds to civil society, ensuring public funds to civil society, ensuring pluralistic representation; pluralistic representation; calls on the Commission to assess the feasibility of a statute for European associations and non-profit organisations in order to fully guarantee the freedom of association throughout the Union; reiterates its call for adequate funding to be available for the organisations concerned through different funding instruments at Union level, such as the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021 – 2027 Rights and Values programme and other Union pilot projects; ______49 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the Draft Act 49 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the Draft Act of Poland on the National Freedom of Poland on the National Freedom Institute - Centre for the Development of Institute - Centre for the Development of Civil Society, Warsaw, 22 August 2017. Civil Society, Warsaw, 22 August 2017.

Or. en

Amendment 170 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40

Motion for a resolution Amendment

40. Calls on the Polish authorities to 40. Stresses that, within the modify the act of 15 September 2017 on framework of existing legislation, the fair, the National Institute for Freedom - impartial and transparent distribution of

AM\1206319EN.docx 103/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Centre for the Development of Civil public funds is fully ensured, and that the Society49, in order to ensure access to procedure for allocating funds is also state funding for critical civil society regulated by the act on the National groups, and a fair, impartial and Freedom Institute; notes that, in transparent distribution of public funds to accordance with the procedure, each civil society, ensuring pluralistic application for funding is assessed by two representation; external experts, and that all conditions of each open competition are the subject of public consultations with non- governmental organisations and are also approved by the Council of the National Freedom Institute before each open competition is announced; stresses that all NGOs and NGO coalitions have the right to submit their comments and amendments to the chart; points out that the eligibility criteria are pluralistic and include everyone, and that all civil society groups and NGOs that meet the definition set out in Article 3 of the act on public benefit and volunteerism can apply for grants; ______49 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the Draft Act of Poland on the National Freedom Institute - Centre for the Development of Civil Society, Warsaw, 22 August 2017.

Or. pl

Amendment 171 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40

Motion for a resolution Amendment

40. Calls on the Polish authorities to 40. Calls on the Polish authorities to modify the act of 15 September 2017 on modify the act of 15 September 2017 on the National Institute for Freedom - Centre the National Institute for Freedom - Centre for the Development of Civil Society49 , in for the Development of Civil Society49 , in order to ensure access to state funding for order to ensure access to state funding for critical civil society groups, and a fair, critical civil society groups at all levels, impartial and transparent distribution of and a fair, impartial and transparent

PE652.541v01-00 104/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN public funds to civil society, ensuring distribution of public funds to civil society pluralistic representation; in a continually shrinking space for it to operate, and ensure pluralistic representation; calls for the rapid adoption of the Rights and Values Programme with adequate funding for the Union values strand; ______49 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the Draft Act 49 OSCE/ODIHR, Opinion on the Draft Act of Poland on the National Freedom of Poland on the National Freedom Institute - Centre for the Development of Institute - Centre for the Development of Civil Society, Warsaw, 22 August 2017. Civil Society, Warsaw, 22 August 2017.

Or. en

Amendment 172 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 20

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Privacy and data protection deleted

Or. pl

Amendment 173 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41

Motion for a resolution Amendment

41. Reiterates its conclusion set out in deleted its resolution of 14 September 2016 that the procedural safeguards and material conditions laid down in the act of 10 June 2016 on anti-terrorist actions and the act

AM\1206319EN.docx 105/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN of 6 April 1990 on the police for the implementation of secret surveillance are not sufficient to prevent its excessive use or unjustified interference with the privacy and data protection of individuals, including of opposition and civil society leaders50; repeats its call on the Commission to carry out an assessment of that legislation as regards its compatibility with Union Law, and urges Polish authorities to fully respect the privacy of all citizens; ______50 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, paras 39-40. See as well Communication by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talks, 23 April 2018.

Or. pl

Amendment 174 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41

Motion for a resolution Amendment

41. Reiterates its conclusion set out in 41. Stresses that the act of 10 June its resolution of 14 September 2016 that 2016 on counter-terrorist activities the procedural safeguards and material provides a legal basis for systemic conditions laid down in the act of 10 June solutions adopted in Poland in the field of 2016 on anti-terrorist actions and the act counter-terrorist activities, and the of 6 April 1990 on the police for the provisions contained therein are aimed, implementation of secret surveillance are inter alia, at enabling the authorities and not sufficient to prevent its excessive use other entities to take effective and or unjustified interference with the proportionate action against terrorist privacy and data protection of individuals, threats; points out, therefore, that the including of opposition and civil society provisions adopted in this act concerning leaders50; repeats its call on the the possibilities of carrying out Commission to carry out an assessment of operational monitoring refer only to a that legislation as regards its compatibility person who is suspected of being likely to

PE652.541v01-00 106/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN with Union Law, and urges Polish engage in terrorist activity and who is not authorities to fully respect the privacy of a Polish citizen; stresses, moreover, that all citizens; in Poland the processing of information by the authorities, including personal data, is carried out in accordance with the principles set out in the provisions of the act of 14 December 2018 on the protection of personal data processed in connection with preventing and combating crime and the act of 5 August 2010 on the protection of classified information, as well as in the rules governing the individual authorities; points out that the rules laid down in the aforementioned acts are in line with the standards of EU law established in this matter, including Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the competent authorities for the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences, the free movement of such data and repealing Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA; states that, pursuant to Article 20 of the acts of 4 April 1990 on police, the police have the right to process information, including personal data, in accordance with their statutory tasks and subject to regulatory restrictions; points out that operational monitoring (covert surveillance) may take place only with the consent of the court, provided that it aims to detect and identify the perpetrators, as well as to obtain and consolidate evidence seized by public prosecution, of intentional crimes set out in Article 19(1), points 1-9 of this act, and provided that other measures have proved ineffective or will not be useful; points out that the act allows that in urgent cases, if this could result in the loss of information or the obliteration or destruction of evidence of a crime, the police, with the written consent of the competent prosecutor, may exercise this right without the consent of the court; notes that they are nevertheless obliged to apply to the court at the same

AM\1206319EN.docx 107/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN time for the issuance of an appropriate provision to that effect; points out that if the court does not give its consent within five days from the date of the operational control order, it shall be suspended and the materials collected during the control shall be recorded in the minutes, provided that their destruction is recorded; notes that the principle being applied is one of judicial and prosecutorial review; ______50 UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, paras 39-40. See as well Communication by UN Experts to urge Poland to ensure free and full participation at climate talks, 23 April 2018.

Or. pl

Amendment 175 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

41a. Is deeply concerned about the transmission of personal data from the Universal Electronic System for Registration of the Population (PESEL register) by the Ministry of Digital Affairs of Poland to the operator of the postal services on 22 April 2020, aimed at facilitating the organisation of the presidential election on 10 May 2020 via postal ballot, despite the lack of a proper legal basis, as the bill allowing for an all- postal election was not adopted by the Polish Parliament until 7 May 2020; notes furthermore that the PESEL register is not identical to the voters

PE652.541v01-00 108/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN register and includes also personal data of citizens of other EU Member States, thus the above-mentioned transfer could constitute a potential breach of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679; recalls that the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) discussed this matter during its meeting on 5 May 2020 and underlined in its subsequent statement that public authorities may disclose information on individuals included in electoral lists, but only when this is specifically authorised by Member State law;

Or. en

Amendment 176 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual education deleted

Or. pl

Amendment 177 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Subheading 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual education deleted

Or. en

Amendment 178

AM\1206319EN.docx 109/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Subheading 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual education Comprehensive sexuality education

Or. en

Amendment 179 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Subheading 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual education Education

Or. pl

Amendment 180 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Subheading 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual education Education

Or. pl

Amendment 181 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42

PE652.541v01-00 110/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

42. Reiterates its deep concern deleted expressed in its resolution of 14 November 2019, also shared by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights51, over the draft law amending Article 200b of the Polish Penal Code, submitted to the Sejm by the ‘Stop Paedophilia’ initiative, for its extremely vague, broad and disproportionate provisions, which de facto seeks to criminalise the dissemination of sexual education to minors and whose scope potentially threatens all persons, in particular parents, teachers and sex educators, with up to three years in prison for teaching about human sexuality, health and intimate relations; stresses the importance of health and sexual education; ______51 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Statement of 14 April 2020.

Or. pl

Amendment 182 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42

Motion for a resolution Amendment

42. Reiterates its deep concern deleted expressed in its resolution of 14 November 2019, also shared by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights51 , over the draft law amending Article 200b of the Polish Penal Code, submitted to the Sejm by the ‘Stop Paedophilia’ initiative, for its extremely vague, broad and disproportionate provisions, which de

AM\1206319EN.docx 111/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN facto seeks to criminalise the dissemination of sexual education to minors and whose scope potentially threatens all persons, in particular parents, teachers and sex educators, with up to three years in prison for teaching about human sexuality, health and intimate relations; stresses the importance of health and sexual education; ______51 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Statement of 14 April 2020.

Or. en

Amendment 183 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42

Motion for a resolution Amendment

42. Reiterates its deep concern 42. Stresses that the draft amendment expressed in its resolution of 14 to the Penal Code was drawn up by the November 2019, also shared by the citizens’ initiative ‘Stop Paedophilia’ and Council of Europe Commissioner for refers to the criminalisation of the Human Rights51, over the draft law promotion of paedophilic behaviour, and amending Article 200b of the Polish Penal emphasises that this does not Code, submitted to the Sejm by the ‘Stop constitute the criminalisation of Paedophilia’ initiative, for its extremely education, but a ban on promoting vague, broad and disproportionate paedophilia; provisions, which de facto seeks to criminalise the dissemination of sexual education to minors and whose scope potentially threatens all persons, in particular parents, teachers and sex educators, with up to three years in prison for teaching about human sexuality, health and intimate relations; stresses the importance of health and sexual education; ______51 Council of Europe Commissioner for

PE652.541v01-00 112/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Human Rights, Statement of 14 April 2020.

Or. pl

Amendment 184 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42

Motion for a resolution Amendment

42. Reiterates its deep concern 42. Stresses that the draft amendment expressed in its resolution of 14 to the Penal Code was drawn up by the November 2019, also shared by the citizens’ initiative ‘Stop Paedophilia’ and Council of Europe Commissioner for refers to the criminalisation of the Human Rights51, over the draft law promotion of paedophilic behaviour; amending Article 200b of the Polish Penal emphasises that this does not constitute Code, submitted to the Sejm by the ‘Stop the criminalisation of education, but a Paedophilia’ initiative, for its extremely ban on promoting paedophilia; vague, broad and disproportionate provisions, which de facto seeks to criminalise the dissemination of sexual education to minors and whose scope potentially threatens all persons, in particular parents, teachers and sex educators, with up to three years in prison for teaching about human sexuality, health and intimate relations; stresses the importance of health and sexual education; ______51 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Statement of 14 April 2020.

Or. pl

Amendment 185 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42

AM\1206319EN.docx 113/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

42. Reiterates its deep concern 42. Reiterates its deep concern expressed in its resolution of 14 November expressed in its resolution of 14 November 2019, also shared by the Council of Europe 2019, also shared by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights51 , over Commissioner for Human Rights51 , over the draft law amending Article 200b of the the draft law amending Article 200b of the Polish Penal Code, submitted to the Sejm Polish Penal Code, submitted to the Sejm by the ‘Stop Paedophilia’ initiative, for its by the ‘Stop Paedophilia’ initiative, for its extremely vague, broad and extremely vague, broad and disproportionate provisions, which de facto disproportionate provisions, which de facto seeks to criminalise the dissemination of seeks to criminalise the dissemination of sexual education to minors and whose sexual education to minors and whose scope potentially threatens all persons, in scope potentially threatens all persons, in particular parents, teachers and sex particular parents, teachers and sex educators, with up to three years in prison educators, with up to three years in prison for teaching about human sexuality, health for teaching about human sexuality, health and intimate relations; stresses the and intimate relations; stresses the importance of health and sexual education; importance of health and sexual education; calls on the Polish Parliament to refrain from adopting the proposed draft law amending Article 200b of the Polish Penal Code and on the Polish authorities to ensure that young people have access to comprehensive sexuality education in line with the World Health Organisation standards and that those who provide such education and information are supported in so doing in a factual and objective manner; ______51 Council of Europe Commissioner for 51 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Statement of 14 April Human Rights, Statement of 14 April 2020. 2020.

Or. en

Amendment 186 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE652.541v01-00 114/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 42. Reiterates its deep concern 42. Reiterates its deep concern expressed in its resolution of 14 November expressed in its resolution of 14 November 2019, also shared by the Council of Europe 2019, also shared by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights51 , over Commissioner for Human Rights51 , over the draft law amending Article 200b of the the original text of the draft law amending Polish Penal Code, submitted to the Sejm Article 200b of the Polish Penal Code, by the ‘Stop Paedophilia’ initiative, for its submitted to the Sejm by the ‘Stop extremely vague, broad and Paedophilia’ initiative, for its extremely disproportionate provisions, which de facto vague, broad and disproportionate seeks to criminalise the dissemination of provisions, which de facto seeks to sexual education to minors and whose criminalise the dissemination of sexual scope potentially threatens all persons, in education to minors and whose scope particular parents, teachers and sex potentially threatens all persons, in educators, with up to three years in prison particular parents, teachers and sex for teaching about human sexuality, health educators, with up to three years in prison and intimate relations; stresses the for teaching about human sexuality, health importance of health and sexual education; and intimate relations; stresses the importance of health and sexual education; ______51 Council of Europe Commissioner for 51 Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Statement of 14 April Human Rights, Statement of 14 April 2020. 2020.

Or. en

Amendment 187 Malin Björk, Konstantinos Arvanitis

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

42a. Stresses that age-appropriate and evidence-based comprehensive sexuality education is key to building young peoples’ skills to form healthy, equal, nurturing and safe relationships, free from discrimination, coercion and violence; believes that comprehensive sexuality education also has a positive impact on gender equality outcomes, including transforming harmful gender norms and attitudes towards gender-based violence, helping prevent intimate partner violence and sexual coercion,

AM\1206319EN.docx 115/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN homophobia and transphobia, breaking the silence around sexual violence, sexual exploitation or abuse, and empowering young people to seek help; urges Poland to ensure access to scientifically accurate and comprehensive sexuality education for all primary and secondary school children in line with WHO standards;

Or. en

Amendment 188 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

42a. Recalls that, in accordance with the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Union must fully respect the ‘responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the organisation of education systems’ and, at the same time, has the task of supporting, complementing and coordinating the development of education;

Or. pl

Amendment 189 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual and reproductive health and rights deleted

Or. pl

PE652.541v01-00 116/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Amendment 190 Roberta Metsola, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Subheading 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual and reproductive health and rights deleted

Or. en

Amendment 191 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Subheading 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual and reproductive health and rights deleted

Or. en

Amendment 192 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Subheading 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual and reproductive health and rights Family law

Or. pl

Amendment 193 Vladimír Bilčík, Paulo Rangel

Motion for a resolution Subheading 22

AM\1206319EN.docx 117/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

Sexual and reproductive health and rights Women’s Rights

Or. en

Amendment 194 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

43. Recalls that Parliament has deleted strongly criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 November 2017, any legislative proposal that would prohibit abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Or. pl

Amendment 195 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

PE652.541v01-00 118/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

43. Recalls that Parliament has deleted strongly criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 November 2017, any legislative proposal that would prohibit abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52 ; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Or. en

Amendment 196 Roberta Metsola, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

43. Recalls that Parliament has deleted strongly criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 November 2017, any legislative proposal that would prohibit abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52 ; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working

AM\1206319EN.docx 119/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Or. en

Amendment 197 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

43. Recalls that Parliament has strongly 43. Recalls that Parliament has strongly criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 November 2017, September 2016 and 15 November 2017, any legislative proposal that would prohibit any legislative proposal that would prohibit abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, emphasizing that universal impairment, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52 ; rights, is a fundamental human right52 ; calls on the Polish Parliament to reject any legislative proposal that seeks to further erode women’s sexual and reproductive rights; strongly affirms that the denial of sexual and reproductive health and rights services is a form of violence against women and girls; calls on the Polish authorities to recognise the inalienable right of women to physical and autonomous decision-making as regards the right to access the full range of reproductive health services, including safe and legal abortion, and to take measures to implement fully the judgments handed down by the European Court of Human Rights in cases against Poland, which has ruled that restrictive abortion laws and lack of implementation violates human rights; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working by UN Experts advising the UN Working

PE652.541v01-00 120/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Group on discrimination against women, Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. Human Rights.

Or. en

Amendment 198 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

43. Recalls that Parliament has 43. Recalls that everyone has the right strongly criticised, already in its to life, and that this is an overriding right resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 which underpins the existence of the November 2017, any legislative proposal entire legal order and forms the that would prohibit abortion in cases of foundation of the European Union; severe or fatal foetal impairment, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Or. pl

Amendment 199 Malin Björk, Konstantinos Arvanitis

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1206319EN.docx 121/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN 43. Recalls that Parliament has strongly 43. Recalls that Parliament has strongly criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 criticised, already in its resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 November 2017, September 2016 and 15 November 2017, any legislative proposal that would prohibit any legislative proposal that would prohibit abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal abortion in cases of severe or fatal foetal impairment, emphasizing that universal impairment, thereby virtually banning access to healthcare, including sexual and access to abortion care in Poland as most reproductive healthcare and the associated legal abortions are performed under this rights, is a fundamental human right52 ; ground, emphasizing that universal access to healthcare, including sexual and reproductive healthcare and the associated rights, is a fundamental human right52 ; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working by UN Experts advising the UN Working Group on discrimination against women, Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights. Human Rights.

Or. en

Amendment 200 Vladimír Bilčík, Paulo Rangel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

43. Recalls that Parliament has 43. Recalls that according to the strongly criticised, already in its Charter of Fundamental Rights, the resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 ECHR and the case law of the European November 2017, any legislative proposal Court of Human Rights, women’s sexual that would prohibit abortion in cases of and reproductive health is related to severe or fatal foetal impairment, multiple human rights, including the right emphasizing that universal access to to life and dignity, freedom from inhuman healthcare, including sexual and and degrading treatment, the right of reproductive healthcare and the access to health care, the right to privacy, associated rights, is a fundamental human the right to education and the prohibition right52 ; of discrimination, as is also reflected in the Polish Constitution; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working

PE652.541v01-00 122/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Or. en

Amendment 201 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

43. Recalls that Parliament has 43. Stresses that the draft strongly criticised, already in its amendment to the act of 7 January 1993 resolutions of 14 September 2016 and 15 on family planning, protection of the November 2017, any legislative proposal human foetus and the conditions of that would prohibit abortion in cases of admissibility for the termination of severe or fatal foetal impairment, pregnancy, which is being negotiated in emphasizing that universal access to the Polish Parliament, is a citizens’ healthcare, including sexual and initiative that is being negotiated in reproductive healthcare and the accordance with the applicable legal associated rights, is a fundamental provisions; notes, however, that the human right52; Government of the Republic of Poland is not working on an amendment to the act on access to abortion; ______52 See as well Statement of 22 March 2018 by UN Experts advising the UN Working Group on discrimination against women, and Statement of 14 April 2020 by the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights.

Or. pl

Amendment 202 Vladimír Bilčík, Paulo Rangel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43 a (new)

AM\1206319EN.docx 123/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Amendment

43a. Recalls Parliament’s criticism regarding the stance of the Polish government towards women’s rights; calls on the Polish government to take a firm stand on women’s rights; calls on Poland to respect the case law of the ECtHR in this regard;

Or. en

Amendment 203 Vladimír Bilčík, Paulo Rangel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 43 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

43b. Stresses that in the area of sexual and reproductive health the Union has complementary and supportive competence while legislative powers in that regard lie with the Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 204 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

44. Recalls that previous attempts to deleted further limit the right to abortion, which in Poland is already among the most restricted in the Union, were halted in 2016 and 2018 as a result of mass opposition from Polish citizens as expressed in the ‘Black Marches’; calls for the law limiting women’s and girls’ access to the emergency contraceptive pill

PE652.541v01-00 124/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN to be repealed;

Or. pl

Amendment 205 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

44. Recalls that previous attempts to deleted further limit the right to abortion, which in Poland is already among the most restricted in the Union, were halted in 2016 and 2018 as a result of mass opposition from Polish citizens as expressed in the ‘Black Marches’; calls for the law limiting women’s and girls’ access to the emergency contraceptive pill to be repealed;

Or. pl

Amendment 206 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

44. Recalls that previous attempts to deleted further limit the right to abortion, which in Poland is already among the most restricted in the Union, were halted in 2016 and 2018 as a result of mass opposition from Polish citizens as expressed in the ‘Black Marches’; calls for the law limiting women’s and girls’ access to the emergency contraceptive pill to be repealed;

AM\1206319EN.docx 125/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Or. en

Amendment 207 Roberta Metsola, Javier Zarzalejos

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

44. Recalls that previous attempts to deleted further limit the right to abortion, which in Poland is already among the most restricted in the Union, were halted in 2016 and 2018 as a result of mass opposition from Polish citizens as expressed in the ‘Black Marches’; calls for the law limiting women’s and girls’ access to the emergency contraceptive pill to be repealed;

Or. en

Amendment 208 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

44. Recalls that previous attempts to 44. Recalls that international law does further limit the right to abortion, which in not recognise the so-called right to Poland is already among the most abortion and no binding treaty recognises restricted in the Union, were halted in such a right, and that the European Court 2016 and 2018 as a result of mass of Human Rights has repeatedly stressed opposition from Polish citizens as that the right to private life cannot be expressed in the ‘Black Marches’; calls interpreted as consenting to the so-called for the law limiting women’s and girls’ right to abortion; recalls that such a right access to the emergency contraceptive pill cannot, furthermore, be considered to to be repealed; emerge as an international custom, since in the vast majority of countries which allow access to abortion, such access constitutes immunity from criminal proceedings and is not defined as a right;

PE652.541v01-00 126/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. pl

Amendment 209 Malin Björk, Konstantinos Arvanitis

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

44a. Stresses that women who decide to end a pregnancy either travel to another country to obtain safe and legal abortion services or undergo potentially unsafe procedures at home and might risk their lives during these procedures; reaffirms that the denial of sexual and reproductive health and rights services, including safe and legal abortion, is a form of violence against women and girls;

Or. en

Amendment 210 Sylwia Spurek

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

44a. Notes that in 2016 the Ministry of Justice prepared a draft motion for consideration to denounce the Istanbul Convention, which is the most comprehensive instrument that sets legally binding standards to prevent gender-based violence; moreover, is deeply concerned that the Polish Deputy Minister of Justice has recently declared that Poland should denounce the Convention;

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 127/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 211 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Subheading 23

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Hate speech, public discrimination and deleted intolerant behaviour against minorities and other vulnerable groups, including LGBTI people

Or. pl

Amendment 212 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Subheading 23

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Hate speech, public discrimination and Hate speech, public discrimination, intolerant behaviour against minorities and violence against women and domestic other vulnerable groups, including LGBTI violence and intolerant behaviour against people minorities and other vulnerable groups, including LGBTI people

Or. en

Amendment 213 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE652.541v01-00 128/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 45. Reiterates its call on the Polish deleted government to take appropriate action on and strongly condemn any xenophobic and fascist hate crime or hate speech53; ______53 EP Resolution of 15 November 2017, para. 18; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 14; UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, CCPR/C/POL/CO/7, paras 15-18.

Or. pl

Amendment 214 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45

Motion for a resolution Amendment

45. Reiterates its call on the Polish 45. Reiterates its call on the Polish government to take appropriate action on government to take appropriate action on and strongly condemn any xenophobic and and strongly condemn any xenophobic and fascist hate crime or hate speech53 ; fascist hate crime or hate speech53 ; urges to take all necessary measures to firmly combat racist hate speech and incitement to violence, including on the Internet, and publicly condemn and distance itself from racist hate speech by public figures, including politicians and media officials, to address prejudices and negative sentiments towards national and ethnic minorities, migrants, refugees and asylum seekers and to ensure effective enforcement of the laws declaring illegal parties or organizations which promote or incite racial discrimination; ______53 EP Resolution of 15 November 2017, 53 EP Resolution of 15 November 2017, para. 18; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of para. 18; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of

AM\1206319EN.docx 129/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN democratic institutions in Poland, para. 14; democratic institutions in Poland, para. 14; UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, CCPR/C/POL/CO/7, paras 15-18. 2016, CCPR/C/POL/CO/7, paras 15-18.

Or. en

Amendment 215 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45

Motion for a resolution Amendment

45. Reiterates its call on the Polish 45. Stresses that the Polish government to take appropriate action on Government conducts monitoring of and strongly condemn any xenophobic crimes motivated by prejudice, and the and fascist hate crime or hate speech53; scope of this monitoring includes information about preparatory proceedings for hate crimes conducted (by the police) throughout the country; points out that hate crimes, due to their high social harmfulness, are included in the Priorities of the Police Commander in Chief; notes that educational activities are also conducted in order to provide police officers with the knowledge and skills necessary to prevent and combat hate crimes; ______53 EP Resolution of 15 November 2017, para. 18; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 14; UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, CCPR/C/POL/CO/7, paras 15-18.

Or. pl

Amendment 216

PE652.541v01-00 130/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45

Motion for a resolution Amendment

45. Reiterates its call on the Polish 45. Reiterates its call on the Polish government to take appropriate action on government to take appropriate action on and strongly condemn any xenophobic and and strongly condemn any hate crime or fascist hate crime or hate speech53 ; hate speech53 ; ______53 EP Resolution of 15 November 2017, 53 EP Resolution of 15 November 2017, para. 18; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of para. 18; PACE, Resolution 2316 (2020) of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of 28 January 2020 on the functioning of democratic institutions in Poland, para. 14; democratic institutions in Poland, para. 14; UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), UN Human Rights Committee (HRC), Concluding observations on the seventh Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland, 23 November periodic report of Poland, 23 November 2016, CCPR/C/POL/CO/7, paras 15-18. 2016, CCPR/C/POL/CO/7, paras 15-18.

Or. en

Amendment 217 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

45a. Encourages the Polish authorities to give practical and effective application to the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention, including by ensuring application of the existing legislation across the country, as well as the provision of a sufficient number and quality of shelters for women victims of violence and their children;

Or. en

AM\1206319EN.docx 131/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Amendment 218 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

45a. Welcomes the actions of Polish authorities condemning xenophobic and fascist hate crime or hate speech and calls on Polish authorities to further taking of appropriate actions in this regard;

Or. en

Amendment 219 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

45b. Urges the Polish authorities to take all measures to eliminate structural discrimination against Roma, to continue its efforts to end all segregation in education faced by Roma children, to take measures to end extreme poverty among Roma, provide genuine solutions for housing problems and to take effective measures to end unemployment among Roma and to eliminate the wage gap;

Or. en

Amendment 220 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 45 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE652.541v01-00 132/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN 45b. Recalls that the Constitution of the Republic of Poland confirms the prohibition of discrimination against anyone on any grounds;

Or. pl

Amendment 221 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its deleted resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination;

Or. pl

Amendment 222 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its deleted resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public

AM\1206319EN.docx 133/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination;

Or. pl

Amendment 223 Maria Walsh

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Recalls its stance expressed in resolution of 18 December 2019, when it its resolution of 18 December 2019, when strongly denounced any discrimination it strongly denounced any against LGBTI people and the violation of discrimination against LGBTI people and their fundamental rights by public the violation of their fundamental rights by authorities, including hate speech by public public authorities, including hate speech by authorities and elected officials, in the public authorities and elected officials, in context of elections, as well as the the context of elections, the banning of declarations of zones in Poland free from and inadequate protection against attacks so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on on Pride marches and awareness-raising the Commission to strongly condemn such programmes and actions such as Rainbow public discrimination; Friday, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’ and adoption of ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’ or key provisions from such charters, discriminating in particular against single-parent and LGBTI families, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination; calls on the Commission to launch infringement proceedings in relation to such declarations of local governments, bearing in mind that homophobic statements constitute discrimination in employment and occupation when they are made by persons who may be perceived as having a decisive influence on

PE652.541v01-00 134/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN recruitment policy of local government; calls on the Polish authorities to adopt legislation addressing the situation of same sex unions and parents with a view to ensuring their enjoyment of the right to non-discrimination in law and in fact in accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights;

Or. en

Amendment 224 Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the context of elections, the banning of and declarations of zones in Poland free from inadequate protection against attacks on so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on Pride marches and awareness-raising the Commission to strongly condemn such programmes and actions such as Rainbow public discrimination; Friday, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’ and adoption of ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’ or key provisions from such charters, discriminating in particular against single-parent and LGBTI families, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination; calls on the Commission to launch infringement proceedings in relation to such declarations of local governments, bearing in mind that homophobic statements constitute discrimination in employment and occupation when they are made

AM\1206319EN.docx 135/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN by persons who may be perceived as having a decisive influence on recruitment policy of local government; calls on the Polish authorities to adopt legislation addressing the situation of same sex unions and parents with a view to ensuring their enjoyment of the right to non-discrimination in law and in fact in accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights;

Or. en

Amendment 225 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the context of elections, the banning of and declarations of zones in Poland free from inadequate protection against attacks on so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on Pride marches and awareness-raising the Commission to strongly condemn such programmes and actions such as Rainbow public discrimination; Friday, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’ and adoption of ‘Regional Charters of Family Rights’ or key provisions from such charters, discriminating in particular against single-parent and LGBTI families, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination; calls on the Commission to launch infringement proceedings in relation to such declarations of local governments, bearing in mind that homophobic statements constitute discrimination in

PE652.541v01-00 136/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN employment and occupation when they are made by persons who may be perceived as having a decisive influence on recruitment policy of local government; calls on the Polish authorities to adopt legislation addressing the situation of same sex unions and parents with a view to ensuring their enjoyment of the right to non- discrimination in law and in fact in accordance with relevant case law of the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights;

Or. en

Amendment 226 Patryk Jaki, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Reiterates its call that resolution of 18 December 2019, when it discrimination against LGBTI people by strongly denounced any discrimination persons performing public functions, against LGBTI people and the violation of including hate speech and violation of their fundamental rights by public personal rights should be denounced, and authorities, including hate speech by calls on the Commission to condemn such public authorities and elected officials, in discrimination; the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination;

Or. en

Amendment 227 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń

Motion for a resolution

AM\1206319EN.docx 137/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the context of elections, the banning of and declarations of zones in Poland free from inadequate protection against attacks on so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on Pride marches and awareness-raising the Commission to strongly condemn such programmes, as well as the declarations of public discrimination; zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination;

Or. en

Amendment 228 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on the Commission to strongly condemn such the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination; public discrimination; notes the lack of any improvement in the situation of LGBTI people in Poland since;

PE652.541v01-00 138/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. en

Amendment 229 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the context of elections, and called on the declarations of zones in Poland free from Commission to strongly condemn such so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on public discrimination; the Commission to strongly condemn such public discrimination;

Or. en

Amendment 230 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46. Recalls its stance expressed in its 46. Recalls its stance expressed in its resolution of 18 December 2019, when it resolution of 18 December 2019, when it strongly denounced any discrimination strongly denounced any discrimination against LGBTI people and the violation of against LGBTI people and the violation of their fundamental rights by public their fundamental rights by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities, including hate speech by public authorities and elected officials, in the authorities and elected officials, in the context of elections, as well as the context of elections, as well as the declarations of zones in Poland free from declarations of zones in Poland free from so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and called on so-called ‘LGBT ideology’, and recalls the the Commission to strongly condemn such condemnation of such actions by the

AM\1206319EN.docx 139/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN public discrimination; Commission as well as international organisations;

Or. en

Amendment 231 Terry Reintke

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46a. Calls on the Polish authorities to refrain from detaining migrant and asylum-seeking children and families with children, to ensure that asylum seekers are properly registered by border guards and promptly referred to asylum authorities and granted access to a lawyer, to increase the duration and amount of the financial support provided to refugees and beneficiaries of subsidiary protection in order to facilitate their full integration into society and to remove all barriers that impede access by undocumented migrant women to affordable maternal health care throughout pregnancy;

Or. en

Amendment 232 Malin Björk, Konstantinos Arvanitis

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

46a. Recalls its position outlined in its resolution of 18 December 2019 on public discrimination and hate speech against LGBTI people, including LGBTI free zones, and condemns the law suits against

PE652.541v01-00 140/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN the civil society activists who published the so called “Atlas of Hate” that documents the spread of homophobia in Poland, and rejects the way the current legal framework and courts and these lawsuits are being used to silence LGBTI activists and prevent them from exercising their right to free speech;

Or. en

Amendment 233 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

47. Notes that the lack of deleted independence of the judiciary in Poland has already started affecting mutual trust between Poland and other Member States, especially in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters; points out that mutual trust between the Member States can be restored only once respect for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured;

Or. pl

Amendment 234 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Łukasz Kohut, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

47. Notes that the lack of independence 47. Notes that the lack of independence of the judiciary in Poland has already of the judiciary in Poland has already started affecting mutual trust between started affecting mutual trust between

AM\1206319EN.docx 141/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Poland and other Member States, Poland and other Member States, in the especially in the field of judicial field of judicial cooperation in criminal cooperation in criminal matters; points out matters, given that national courts have that mutual trust between the Member refused to or hesitated to release Polish States can be restored only once respect for suspects under the European Arrest the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is Warrant (EAW) procedure due to ensured; profound doubts about the independence of the Polish judiciary; points out that mutual trust between the Member States can be restored only once respect for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured;

Or. en

Amendment 235 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

47. Notes that the lack of independence 47. Notes that the lack of independence of the judiciary in Poland has already of the judiciary in Poland has already started affecting mutual trust between started affecting mutual trust between Poland and other Member States, Poland and other Member States, especially in the field of judicial especially in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters; points out cooperation in criminal matters; points out that mutual trust between the Member that mutual trust between the Member States can be restored only once respect for States can be restored only once respect for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured; ensured; considers the threat to the uniformity of the Union legal order posed by rule of law deconsolidation in Poland to be particularly serious;

Or. en

Amendment 236 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

PE652.541v01-00 142/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

47. Notes that the lack of independence 47. Recognises that the issue of of the judiciary in Poland has already independence of the judiciary in Poland is started affecting mutual trust between an area under the exclusive competence Poland and other Member States, of that Member State and cannot especially in the field of judicial constitute grounds for mutual mistrust cooperation in criminal matters; points out between Poland and other Member States, that mutual trust between the Member including in the field of judicial States can be restored only once respect cooperation in criminal matters; for the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured;

Or. pl

Amendment 237 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

47. Notes that the lack of independence 47. Notes in case the Council would of the judiciary in Poland has already determine that there is lack of started affecting mutual trust between independence of the judiciary in Poland, Poland and other Member States, this could affect mutual trust between especially in the field of judicial Poland and other Member States, cooperation in criminal matters; points out especially in the field of judicial that mutual trust between the Member cooperation in criminal matters; points out States can be restored only once respect for that mutual trust between the Member the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is States can be restored only once respect for ensured; the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU is ensured;

Or. en

Amendment 238 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters, Isabel Wiseler-Lima

AM\1206319EN.docx 143/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48

Motion for a resolution Amendment

48. Calls on the Polish government to 48. Calls on the Polish government to comply with all provisions relating to the comply with all provisions relating to the rule of law and fundamental rights rule of law and fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and international human rights standards, and international human rights standards, and to engage directly in dialogue with the to engage directly in dialogue with the Commission; calls on the Polish Commission; stresses that such a dialogue government to swiftly implement the needs to be conducted in an impartial, rulings of the CJEU and to respect the evidence-based and cooperative manner primacy of Union law; while also respecting the competences of the Union and its Member States as enshrined in the Treaties, and the principle of subsidiarity; calls on the Polish government to cooperate with the Commission pursuant to the principle of sincere cooperation as set out in the Treaty; calls on the Polish government to swiftly implement the rulings of the CJEU and to respect the primacy of Union law;

Or. en

Amendment 239 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48

Motion for a resolution Amendment

48. Calls on the Polish government to 48. Calls on the Polish Government to comply with all provisions relating to the comply with all provisions relating to the rule of law and fundamental rights rule of law enshrined in the Treaties, the enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of ECHR and international human rights Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and standards, and to engage directly in international human rights standards, and dialogue with the Commission; to engage directly in dialogue with the Commission; calls on the Polish government to swiftly implement the rulings of the CJEU and to respect the primacy of Union law;

PE652.541v01-00 144/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN Or. pl

Amendment 240 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48

Motion for a resolution Amendment

48. Calls on the Polish government to 48. Affirms that the Polish comply with all provisions relating to the Government is complying with all rule of law and fundamental rights provisions relating to the rule of law and enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of fundamental rights enshrined in the Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental international human rights standards, and Rights, the ECHR and international human to engage directly in dialogue with the rights standards, and that it is engaging Commission; calls on the Polish directly in dialogue with the Commission; government to swiftly implement the acknowledges the measures taken by the rulings of the CJEU and to respect the Polish Government to swiftly implement primacy of Union law; the rulings of the CJEU and to respect the primacy of Union law;

Or. pl

Amendment 241 Michal Šimečka, Olivier Chastel, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Morten Petersen, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Moritz Körner, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Hilde Vautmans, Malik Azmani, Fabienne Keller, Abir Al-Sahlani, Anna Júlia Donáth, Ramona Strugariu, Yana Toom

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48

Motion for a resolution Amendment

48. Calls on the Polish government to 48. Calls on the Polish government to comply with all provisions relating to the comply with all provisions relating to the rule of law and fundamental rights rule of law and fundamental rights enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of enshrined in the Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and international human rights standards, and international human rights standards, and to engage directly in dialogue with the to engage directly in honest dialogue with Commission; calls on the Polish the Commission; calls on the Polish

AM\1206319EN.docx 145/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN government to swiftly implement the government to swiftly and fully implement rulings of the CJEU and to respect the the rulings of the CJEU and to respect the primacy of Union law; primacy of Union law;

Or. en

Amendment 242 Ramona Strugariu, Olivier Chastel, Anna Júlia Donáth, Fabienne Keller, Michal Šimečka, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Yana Toom, Dragoş Tudorache, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Abir Al-Sahlani, Nathalie Loiseau, Hilde Vautmans

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

48a. Calls on the Council and the Commission to refrain from narrowly interpreting the rule of law principle, and to use the Article 7(1) TEU procedure to its full potential by addressing the implications of the Polish government’s action for all the principles enshrined in Article 2 TEU, including democracy and fundamental rights, such as freedom of association, women’s rights, media freedom and the right to free and fair elections;

Or. en

Amendment 243 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

49. Calls upon the Council to resume deleted the formal hearings - the last one of which was held as long ago as December 2018 - as soon as possible and to include in those hearings all the latest and major negative developments in the areas of rule

PE652.541v01-00 146/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges the Council to finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of overwhelming evidence thereof as displayed in this resolution and in so many reports of international and European organisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. pl

Amendment 244 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

49. Calls upon the Council to resume 49. Calls upon the Council to adopt a the formal hearings - the last one of final position under the Article 7(1) TEU which was held as long ago as December procedure; calls on the Council to keep 2018 - as soon as possible and to include Parliament regularly informed and closely in those hearings all the latest and major involved; negative developments in the areas of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges the Council to finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of overwhelming evidence thereof as displayed in this resolution and in so many reports of international and

AM\1206319EN.docx 147/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN European organisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. en

Amendment 245 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

49. Calls upon the Council to resume 49. Sees no need for the Council to the formal hearings - the last one of which resume formal hearings in the context of was held as long ago as December 2018 - taking into account all the latest and major as soon as possible and to include in those clarifications provided by the Polish hearings all the latest and major negative authorities and the findings of this developments in the areas of rule of law, procedure in the areas of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges democracy and fundamental rights; the Council to finally act under the Article Strongly recommends that the Council, 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there when formulating possible is a clear risk of a serious breach by the recommendations, conduct a dialogue Republic of Poland of the values referred with the Polish authorities in accordance to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of with the principle of partnership and overwhelming evidence thereof as respect for Polish sovereignty, especially displayed in this resolution and in so in areas not covered by EU competences; many reports of international and European organisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to

PE652.541v01-00 148/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. pl

Amendment 246 Ramona Strugariu, Olivier Chastel, Anna Júlia Donáth, Fabienne Keller, Michal Šimečka, Sophia in ‘t Veld, Yana Toom, Dragoş Tudorache, Maite Pagazaurtundúa, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Abir Al-Sahlani, Nathalie Loiseau, Hilde Vautmans

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

49. Calls upon the Council to resume 49. Calls upon the Council to resume the formal hearings - the last one of which the formal hearings - the last one of which was held as long ago as December 2018 - was held as long ago as December 2018 - as soon as possible and to include in those as soon as possible and to include in those hearings all the latest and major negative hearings all the latest and major negative developments in the areas of rule of law, developments in the areas of rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; urges democracy and fundamental rights; urges the Council to finally act under the Article the Council to finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by the a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the values referred Republic of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of overwhelming evidence thereof as overwhelming evidence thereof as displayed in this resolution and in so many displayed in this resolution and in so many reports of international and European reports of international and European organisations, the case-law of the CJEU organisations, the case-law of the CJEU and the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights and reports by civil society organisations; and reports by civil society organisations; strongly recommends that the Council strongly recommends that the Council address concrete recommendations to address concrete recommendations to Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and that it indicate deadlines for the that it indicate deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; implementation of those recommendations; calls on the Council to keep Parliament calls furthermore on the Council to regularly informed and closely involved; commit to assessing the implementation of these recommendations in a timely manner and, should conditions warrant it, move forward under Article 7(2) TEU;

AM\1206319EN.docx 149/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN calls on the Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved; points out the need for informing, in a transparent manner, about the proceedings in the Council in order to allow for meaningful participation and oversight by all European institutions and civil society;

Or. en

Amendment 247 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

49. Calls upon the Council to resume 49. Calls upon the Council to resume the formal hearings - the last one of which the formal hearings on the situation in was held as long ago as December 2018 - Poland - the last one of which was held as as soon as possible and to include in those long ago as December 2018 - as soon as hearings all the latest and major negative possible and to include in those hearings all developments in the areas of rule of law, the latest and major negative developments democracy and fundamental rights; urges in the areas of rule of law, democracy and the Council to finally act under the Article fundamental rights; urges the Council to 7(1) TEU procedure by finding that there is finally act under the Article 7(1) TEU a clear risk of a serious breach by the procedure by finding that there is a clear Republic of Poland of the values referred risk of a serious breach by the Republic of to in Article 2 TEU, in the light of Poland of the values referred to in Article 2 overwhelming evidence thereof as TEU, in the light of overwhelming displayed in this resolution and in so many evidence thereof as displayed in this reports of international and European resolution and in so many reports of organisations, the case-law of the CJEU international and European organisations, and the European Court of Human Rights the case-law of the CJEU and the European and reports by civil society organisations; Court of Human Rights and reports by civil strongly recommends that the Council society organisations; strongly address concrete recommendations to recommends that the Council address Poland, as provided for in Article 7(1) concrete recommendations to Poland, as TEU, as a follow-up to the hearings, and provided for in Article 7(1) TEU, as a that it indicate deadlines for the follow-up to the hearings, and that it implementation of those recommendations; indicate deadlines for the implementation calls on the Council to keep Parliament of those recommendations; calls on the regularly informed and closely involved; Council to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved, as well as to allow for a meaningful participation of

PE652.541v01-00 150/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN civil society organisations in the matter;

Or. en

Amendment 248 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

50. Calls on the Commission to make deleted full use of the tools available to it, to address a clear risk of a serious breach by Poland of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures and applications for interim measures before the CJEU, as well as budgetary tools; calls on the Commission to continue to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. pl

Amendment 249 Balázs Hidvéghi

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

50. Calls on the Commission to make deleted full use of the tools available to it, to address a clear risk of a serious breach by Poland of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures and applications for interim measures before the CJEU, as well as budgetary tools; calls on the Commission to continue to keep

AM\1206319EN.docx 151/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. en

Amendment 250 Konstantinos Arvanitis, Malin Björk

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

50. Calls on the Commission to make 50. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to it, to full use of the tools available to it, to address a clear risk of a serious breach by address a clear risk of a serious breach by Poland of the values on which the Union is Poland of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures and applications infringement procedures and applications for interim measures before the CJEU, as for interim measures before the CJEU, as well as budgetary tools; calls on the well as budgetary tools; calls on the Commission to continue to keep Commission to continue to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely Parliament regularly informed and closely involved; involved; also calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools mentioned and to consider further measures in the event of a repeated threat to the principles enshrined in Article 2 TEU by a Member State;

Or. en

Amendment 251 Beata Kempa

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

50. Calls on the Commission to make 50. Urges the Commission to put an full use of the tools available to it, to end as soon as possible to all actions address a clear risk of a serious breach by against Poland that violate the rights of Poland of the values on which the Union sovereign Member States to internal is founded, in particular expedited reform, which are supported by false,

PE652.541v01-00 152/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN infringement procedures and applications unilateral arguments and are becoming for interim measures before the CJEU, as part of the political game against well as budgetary tools; calls on the Poland in its capacity as a full member of Commission to continue to keep the European Union; Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. pl

Amendment 252 Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Isabel Santos, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Pietro Bartolo, Sylwia Spurek, Sylvie Guillaume, Bettina Vollath, Raphaël Glucksmann, Dietmar Köster, Katarina Barley, Kati Piri, Robert Biedroń, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

50. Calls on the Commission to make 50. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to it, to full use of the tools available to it, to address a clear risk of a serious breach by address a clear risk of a serious breach by Poland of the values on which the Union is Poland of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures and applications infringement procedures and applications for interim measures before the CJEU, as for interim measures before the CJEU, as well as budgetary tools; calls on the well as budgetary tools; strongly supports Commission to continue to keep the Commission’s approach on inclusion Parliament regularly informed and closely of rule of law conditionality in the future involved; Multiannual Financial Framework; calls on the Commission to continue to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. en

Amendment 253 Roberta Metsola, Paulo Rangel, Jeroen Lenaers, Vladimír Bilčík, Javier Zarzalejos, Kris Peeters

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1206319EN.docx 153/154 PE652.541v01-00 EN 50. Calls on the Commission to make 50. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to it, to full use of the tools available to it, to address a clear risk of a serious breach by address a clear risk of a serious breach by Poland of the values on which the Union is Poland of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures and applications infringement procedures and applications for interim measures before the CJEU, as for interim measures before the CJEU, as well as budgetary tools; calls on the well as explore whether there are Commission to continue to keep budgetary tools that can be introduced in Parliament regularly informed and closely this regard as a last resort; calls on the involved; Commission to continue to keep Parliament regularly informed and closely involved;

Or. en

Amendment 254 Beata Kempa, Jadwiga Wiśniewska, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński on behalf of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Patryk Jaki

Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51

Motion for a resolution Amendment

51. Instructs its President to forward deleted this resolution to the Council and the Commission and to the President, government and parliament of the Republic of Poland, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

Or. pl

PE652.541v01-00 154/154 AM\1206319EN.docx EN