En En Amendments

European Parliament 2014-2019

Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

2017/2131(INL)

25.6.2018

AMENDMENTS 68 - 263

Draft report Judith Sargentini (PE620.837v01-00)

on a proposal calling on the Council to determine, pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded (2017/2131(INL))

AM\1157114EN.docx PE622.146v02-00

EN United in diversity EN

AM_Com_NonLegReport

PE622.146v02-00 2/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 68 Judith Sargentini

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 12

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(12) Since 2012, Hungary has taken (12) Since 2012, Hungary has taken positive steps to transfer certain functions positive steps to transfer certain functions from the president of the NJO to the NJC from the president of the NJO to the NJC in order to create a better balance between in order to create a better balance between these two organs. However, further these two organs. However, further progress is still required. GRECO, in its progress is still required. GRECO, in its report adopted on 27 March 2015, called report adopted on 27 March 2015, called for minimising the potential risks of for minimising the potential risks of discretionary decisions by the president of discretionary decisions by the president of the NJO. The president of the NJO is, inter the NJO. The president of the NJO is, inter alia, able to transfer and assign judges, and alia, able to transfer and assign judges, and has a role in judicial discipline. The has a role in judicial discipline. The president of the NJO also makes a president of the NJO also makes a recommendation to the President of recommendation to the President of Hungary to appoint and remove heads of Hungary to appoint and remove heads of courts, including presidents and vice- courts, including presidents and vice- presidents of the Courts of Appeal. presidents of the Courts of Appeal. On 2 GRECO welcomed the recently adopted May 2018, the NJC held a session where Code of Ethics for Judges, but considered it unanimously adopted decisions that it could be made more explicit and concerning the practice of the president of accompanied by in-service training. the NJO with regard to declaring calls for applications to judicial positions and senior positions unsuccessful. The decisions found the president’s practice unlawful. GRECO also welcomed the recently adopted Code of Ethics for Judges, but considered that it could be made more explicit and accompanied by in-service training.

Or. en

Amendment 69 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 13

AM\1157114EN.docx 3/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(13) Following the judgment of the (13) Following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court of Justice”) of 6 November (the “Court of Justice”) of 6 November 2012 in Case C-286/12, Commission v. 2012 in Case C-286/12, Commission v. Hungary1, which held that by adopting a Hungary, which held that by adopting a national scheme requiring the compulsory national scheme requiring the compulsory retirement of judges, prosecutors and retirement of judges, prosecutors and notaries when they reach the age of 62, notaries when they reach the age of 62, Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations under Union law, the Hungarian under Union law, the Hungarian Parliament adopted Act XX of 2013 which Parliament adopted Act XX of 2013 which provided that the judicial retirement age is provided that the judicial retirement age is to be gradually reduced to 65 years of age to be gradually reduced to 65 years of age over a ten year period and set out the over a ten year period and set out the criteria for reinstatement or compensation. criteria for reinstatement or compensation. In its report of October 2015, the In its report of October 2015, the International Bar Association’s Human International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute stated that a majority of the Rights Institute stated that a majority of the removed judges did not return to their removed judges did not return to their original positions. original positions, although the amendments introduced by Act XX of 2013 provided the possibility for retired judges to return to their former posts at the same court under the same conditions as prior to the regulations on retirement, or if they were unwilling to return, they received a 12-month lump sum compensation for their lost remuneration, and could file for further compensation before the court; the individual choices of the judges cannot therefore be held against Hungary. ______1 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 1 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 November 2012, Commission v. Hungary, November 2012, Commission v. Hungary, C-286/12, ECLI:EU:C:2012:687. C-286/12, ECLI:EU:C:2012:687.

Or. en

Amendment 70 Kinga Gál

PE622.146v02-00 4/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 13

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(13) Following the judgment of the (13) Following the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court of Justice”) of 6 November (the “Court of Justice”) of 6 November 2012 in Case C-286/12, Commission v. 2012 in Case C-286/12, Commission v. Hungary1, which held that by adopting a Hungary1, which held that by adopting a national scheme requiring the compulsory national scheme requiring the compulsory retirement of judges, prosecutors and retirement of judges, prosecutors and notaries when they reach the age of 62, notaries when they reach the age of 62, Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations under Union law, the Hungarian under Union law, the Hungarian Parliament adopted Act XX of 2013 which Parliament adopted Act XX of 2013 which provided that the judicial retirement age is provided that the judicial retirement age is to be gradually reduced to 65 years of age to be gradually reduced to 65 years of age over a ten year period and set out the over a ten year period and set out the criteria for reinstatement or compensation. criteria for reinstatement or compensation. In its report of October 2015, the The Commission continuously monitored International Bar Association’s Human the implementation of the new Hungarian Rights Institute stated that a majority of law on retirement and on 20th November the removed judges did not return to their 2013 acknowledged the measures of original positions. Hungary to make its retirement law compatible with EU law; the Commission was further satisfied with the implemented remedies concerning the affected judges, prosecutors and public notaries, including the right of reinstatement without judicial procedure, and the right to compensation. ______1 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 1 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 6 November 2012, Commission v. Hungary, November 2012, Commission v. Hungary, C-286/12, ECLI:EU:C:2012:687. C-286/12, ECLI:EU:C:2012:687.

Or. en

Amendment 71 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 14

AM\1157114EN.docx 5/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(14) In its judgment of 16 July 2015, deleted Gaszó v. Hungary, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) held that there had been a violation of the right to a fair trial and the right to an effective remedy. The ECtHR came to the conclusion that the violations originated in a practice which consisted in Hungary’s recurrent failure to ensure that proceedings determining civil rights and obligations are completed within a reasonable time and to take measures enabling applicants to claim redress for excessively long civil proceedings at a domestic level. The execution of that judgment is still pending.

Or. en

Amendment 72 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 14

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(14) In its judgment of 16 July 2015, (14) In its judgment of 16 July 2015, Gaszó v. Hungary, the European Court of Gazsó v. Hungary, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) held that there had Human Rights (ECtHR) held that there had been a violation of the right to a fair trial been a violation of the right to a fair trial and the right to an effective remedy. The and the right to an effective remedy. The ECtHR came to the conclusion that the ECtHR came to the conclusion that the violations originated in a practice which violations originated in a practice which consisted in Hungary’s recurrent failure to consisted in Hungary’s recurrent failure to ensure that proceedings determining civil ensure that proceedings determining civil rights and obligations are completed within rights and obligations are completed within a reasonable time and to take measures a reasonable time and to take measures enabling applicants to claim redress for enabling applicants to claim redress for excessively long civil proceedings at a excessively long civil proceedings at a domestic level. The execution of that domestic level. The new Code of Civil judgment is still pending. Procedure of Hungary adopted in 2016 provides for the acceleration of civil proceedings and the new Code of

PE622.146v02-00 6/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Criminal Proceedings contributes to the expediency and effectiveness of proceedings. Hungary has duly informed the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe that the new law creating an effective remedy for prolonged procedures will be adopted by October 2018.

Or. en

Amendment 73 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 15

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(15) In its judgment of 23 June 2016, deleted Baka v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that there had been a violation of the right of access to a court and the freedom of expression of András Baka, who had been elected as President of the Supreme Court for a six-year term in June 2009, but ceased to have this position in accordance with the transitional provisions in the Fundamental Law, providing that the Curia would be the legal successor to the Supreme Court. The execution of that judgment is still pending because the Hungarian Government denies the fact that there is a need to take measures to prevent further premature removals of judges on similar grounds, safeguarding any abuse in this regard.

Or. en

Amendment 74 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 15

AM\1157114EN.docx 7/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(15) In its judgment of 23 June 2016, (15) In its judgment of 23 June 2016, Baka v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that Baka v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that there had been a violation of the right of there had been a violation of the right of access to a court and the freedom of access to a court and the freedom of expression of András Baka, who had been expression of András Baka, who had been elected as President of the Supreme Court elected as President of the Supreme Court for a six-year term in June 2009, but ceased for a six-year term in June 2009, but ceased to have this position in accordance with the to have this position in accordance with the transitional provisions in the Fundamental transitional provisions in the Fundamental Law, providing that the Curia would be the Law, providing that the Curia would be the legal successor to the Supreme Court. The legal successor to the Supreme Court. No execution of that judgment is still pending further general measures were found because the Hungarian Government denies necessary apart from the necessarily the fact that there is a need to take provided restitutio in integrum – since the measures to prevent further premature violation found by the Court resulted from removals of judges on similar grounds, a one-time constitutional reform of the safeguarding any abuse in this regard. Hungarian judicial system – and the general measures solicited by the Committee of Ministers’ decision of 10th March 2017 are not related to the implementation of the judgment since the existence of related guarantees (regarding all Hungarian judges except the president of the Supreme Court) has never been called into question by the Court.

Or. en

Amendment 75 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 16

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(16) On 29 September 2008, Mr András (16) On 29 September 2008, Mr András Jóri was appointed Data Protection Jóri was appointed Data Protection Supervisor for a term of six years. Supervisor for a term of six years. However, with effect from 1 January 2012, However, with effect from 1 January 2012, the Hungarian Parliament decided to the Hungarian Parliament decided to reform the data protection system and reform the data protection system and replace the Supervisor with a national replace the Supervisor with a national authority for data protection and freedom authority for data protection and freedom

PE622.146v02-00 8/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

of information. Mr Jóri had to vacate office of information. Mr Jóri had to vacate office before his full term had expired. On 8 April before his full term had expired. On 8 April 2014, the Court of Justice held that the 2014, the Court of Justice held that the independence of supervisory authorities independence of supervisory authorities necessarily includes the obligation to allow necessarily includes the obligation to allow them to serve their full term of office and them to serve their full term of office and that Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations that Hungary failed to fulfil its obligations under Directive 95/46/EC of the European under Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council2. Parliament and of the Council2. Hungary amended the rules on the appointment of the president of the Hungarian National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, based on the suggestions of the European Commission, presented an apology by sending a ministerial letter to András Jóri, issued a public notice to András Jóri and to the Hungarian news agency, as well as paid the agreed sum of compensation. Mr Jóri considered the material and moral compensation as fair and accepted it voluntarily, furthermore he declared that he had no more claims and so the case was closed in a mutually satisfactory manner. ______2 Directive 95/46/EC of the European 2 Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995 P. 31). such data (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995 P. 31).

Or. en

Amendment 76 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 17

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(17) The Venice Commission identified deleted several shortcomings in its Opinion on Act CLXIII of 2011 on the Prosecution

AM\1157114EN.docx 9/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Service and Act CLXIV of 2011 on the Status of the Prosecutor General, Prosecutors and other Prosecution Employees and the Prosecution Career of Hungary, adopted on 19 June 2012. In its report, adopted on 27 March 2015, GRECO urged the Hungarian authorities to take additional steps to prevent abuse and increase the independence of the prosecution service by, inter alia, removing the possibility for the Prosecutor General to be re-elected. In addition, GRECO called for disciplinary proceedings against ordinary prosecutors to be made more transparent and for decisions to move cases from one prosecutor to another to be guided by strict legal criteria and justifications.

Or. en

Amendment 77 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 17

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(17) The Venice Commission identified (17) The Venice Commission identified several shortcomings in its Opinion on Act several shortcomings in its Opinion on Act CLXIII of 2011 on the Prosecution Service CLXIII of 2011 on the Prosecution Service and Act CLXIV of 2011 on the Status of and Act CLXIV of 2011 on the Status of the Prosecutor General, Prosecutors and the Prosecutor General, Prosecutors and other Prosecution Employees and the other Prosecution Employees and the Prosecution Career of Hungary, adopted on Prosecution Career of Hungary, adopted on 19 June 2012. In its report, adopted on 27 19 June 2012. In its report, adopted on 27 March 2015, GRECO urged the Hungarian March 2015, GRECO urged the Hungarian authorities to take additional steps to authorities to take additional steps to prevent abuse and increase the prevent abuse and increase the independence of the prosecution service independence of the prosecution service by, inter alia, removing the possibility for by, inter alia, removing the possibility for the Prosecutor General to be re-elected. In the Prosecutor General to be re-elected. In addition, GRECO called for disciplinary addition, GRECO called for disciplinary proceedings against ordinary prosecutors to proceedings against ordinary prosecutors to be made more transparent and for decisions be made more transparent and for decisions to move cases from one prosecutor to to move cases from one prosecutor to

PE622.146v02-00 10/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

another to be guided by strict legal criteria another to be guided by strict legal criteria and justifications. and justifications. The 2017 GRECO Compliance Report however, which assesses the implementation of the 2015recommendations, acknowledged the progress made by Hungary and a report is to be submitted by 30th June 2018 on the progress in implementing the recommendations, which means that there is an ongoing dialogue between the GRECO and Hungarian authorities.

Or. en

Amendment 78 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 17 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(17a) The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) expresses in its Report 2015 deep concern that, following the significant legislative reform implemented during Hungary’s incumbent government’s first term in office, the independence and impartiality of the Hungarian judiciary can’t be guaranteed and the rule of law guarantees remain weakened.

Or. en

Amendment 79 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 17 a (new)

AM\1157114EN.docx 11/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(17a) On 2 May 2018, a report of the National Judicial Council, composed of 15 judges elected by their peers, mandated to examine how the President, Tunde Hanro, discharged her duties, has called into question the autonomy of the Hungarian judicial system. The Council states in its report that Ms Hanro has used her position of power to influence the appointment of senior judges.

Or. fr

Amendment 80 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 18

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(18) In its report adopted on 27 March deleted 2015, GRECO called for the establishment of codes of conduct for members of the Hungarian Parliament (MPs) concerning guidance for cases of conflicts of interest. Furthermore, MPs should also be obliged to report conflicts of interest in an ad hoc manner and this should be accompanied by a more robust obligation to submit asset declarations. This should also be accompanied by provisions that allow for sanctions for submitting inaccurate asset declarations.

Or. en

Amendment 81 Michał Boni, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 18

PE622.146v02-00 12/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(18) In its report adopted on 27 March (18) In its report adopted on 27 March 2015, GRECO called for the establishment 2015, GRECO called for the establishment of codes of conduct for members of the of codes of conduct for members of the Hungarian Parliament (MPs) concerning Hungarian Parliament (MPs) concerning guidance for cases of conflicts of interest. guidance for cases of conflicts of interest. Furthermore, MPs should also be obliged Furthermore, MPs should also be obliged to report conflicts of interest in an ad hoc to report conflicts of interest in an ad hoc manner and this should be accompanied by manner and this should be accompanied by a more robust obligation to submit asset a more robust obligation to submit asset declarations. This should also be declarations. This should also be accompanied by provisions that allow for accompanied by provisions that allow for sanctions for submitting inaccurate asset sanctions for submitting inaccurate asset declarations. declarations. Moreover, the asset declarations should be made public online to allow for genuine popular oversight; standard electronic database should be put in place to allow for all declarations and modifications thereof to be accessible in a transparent manner.

Or. en

Amendment 82 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 18

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(18) In its report adopted on 27 March (18) In its report adopted on 27 March 2015, GRECO called for the establishment 2015, GRECO called for the establishment of codes of conduct for members of the of codes of conduct for members of the Hungarian Parliament (MPs) concerning Hungarian Parliament (MPs) concerning guidance for cases of conflicts of interest. guidance for cases of conflicts of interest Furthermore, MPs should also be obliged which arise in an ad hoc manner. to report conflicts of interest in an ad hoc Although the current regulation can be manner and this should be accompanied considered rather strict even by European by a more robust obligation to submit standards, it is recommended to consider asset declarations. This should also be introducing provisions that allow for accompanied by provisions that allow for sanctions for submitting inaccurate asset sanctions for submitting inaccurate asset declarations. declarations.

AM\1157114EN.docx 13/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Or. en

Amendment 83 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(19) In its statement adopted on 9 April deleted 2018, the limited election observation mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights concluded that the limited monitoring of campaign spending and the absence of thorough reporting on sources of campaign funds undercuts campaign finance transparency and the ability of voters to make an informed choice, contrary to OSCE commitments and international standards.

Or. en

Amendment 84 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(19) In its statement adopted on 9 April (19) In its statement of preliminary 2018, the limited election observation findings and conclusions adopted on 9 mission of the OSCE Office for April 2018, the limited election Democratic Institutions and Human Rights observation mission of the OSCE Office concluded that the limited monitoring of for Democratic Institutions and Human campaign spending and the absence of Rights concluded that the limited thorough reporting on sources of campaign monitoring of campaign spending and the funds undercuts campaign finance absence of thorough reporting on sources transparency and the ability of voters to of campaign funds until after the elections make an informed choice, contrary to undercuts campaign finance transparency, OSCE commitments and international contrary to OSCE commitments and standards. international standards. However, there

PE622.146v02-00 14/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

has not been any deterioration or declining trend at all in the last few years or as compared to the date of Hungary’s accession to the EU. On the contrary, the Act LXXXVII of2013 on the Transparency of Political Campaign Financing set the maximum amount allowed to be spent for campaign activities, established strict rules on the use of such funds and on the monitoring of campaign spending. Although the preliminary conclusions of the OSCE would claim for a more detailed reporting and monitoring system also during, and not only after, the elections, the Act opted for an ex-post monitoring and controlling mechanism. While the potential maximum limits are set out by law in advance, the Act also introduced a requirement according to which all candidates and nominating organisations, within 60 days after the final results of the elections, shall make public all their actual campaign spending, also including the sources and purposes of the spending. The State Audit Office has the competence to monitor and control whether the legal requirements have been met.

Or. en

Amendment 85 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 19

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(19) In its statement adopted on 9 April (19) In its statement adopted on 9 April 2018, the limited election observation 2018, the limited election observation mission of the OSCE Office for mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Democratic Institutions and Human Rights concluded that the limited monitoring of concluded that the limited monitoring of campaign spending and the absence of campaign spending and the absence of thorough reporting on sources of campaign thorough reporting on sources of campaign

AM\1157114EN.docx 15/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

funds undercuts campaign finance funds undercuts campaign finance transparency and the ability of voters to transparency, contrary to OSCE make an informed choice, contrary to commitments and international standards. OSCE commitments and international This OSCE report however, did not standards. include the official audit report of The State Audit Office (the enforcement authority for state aids) concerning the 2018 parliamentary elections, as it had not been completed at the time.

Or. en

Amendment 86 Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo Castaldo

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 19 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(19a) According to the annual Corruption Perceptions Index on perceived levels of corruption in 2017, published by Transparency International, Hungary ranks 66th with a score of 45 out of 100, three points less than a year ago and 10 points less than in 2012. Numerous non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and business associations have reported that corruption in Hungary poses a significant risk to companies, especially in the areas of tax administration and public procurement. Public procurement is an area that is particularly vulnerable to local irregularities due to robust informal relations between businesses and politicians. Even though corruption in the public and private sectors is considered a crime that is expressly punishable under the Hungarian Criminal Code, that legislation is not being properly implemented.

Or. it

PE622.146v02-00 16/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 87 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20) On 7 December 2016, the Open deleted Government Partnership (OGP) Steering Committee received a letter from the Government of Hungary announcing its immediate withdrawal from the partnership. The Government of Hungary had been under review by OGP since July 2015 for concerns raised by civil society organisations regarding their space to operate in the country.

Or. en

Amendment 88 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20) On 7 December 2016, the Open (20) On 7 December 2016, the Open Government Partnership (OGP) Steering Government Partnership (OGP) Steering Committee received a letter from the Committee received a letter from the Government of Hungary announcing its Government of Hungary announcing its immediate withdrawal from the immediate withdrawal from the partnership. The Government of Hungary partnership, in line with the fact that the had been under review by OGP since July OGP is a multilateral initiative based on 2015 for concerns raised by civil society voluntary membership and therefore it is organisations regarding their space to only up to the free decision of operate in the country. participating countries to join or to withdraw. It must be further noted that not all the EU Member States are members of the OGP, e.g. Austria, Belgium and Slovenia.. The Government of Hungary had been under review by OGP since July 2015 for concerns raised by civil society organisations regarding their space to operate in the country, which is exactly

AM\1157114EN.docx 17/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

the reason of the Hungarian withdrawal, since the opinions of international NGOs constantly criticising Hungary have been widely accepted in the organisation’s reports but the government response has been completely neglected and thus the organisation has become a forum for the reproof of a few countries, instead of discussing and exchanging good government practices.

Or. en

Amendment 89 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20) On 7 December 2016, the Open (20) On 7 December 2016, while co- Government Partnership (OGP) Steering chaired by the French government, the Committee received a letter from the Open Government Partnership (OGP) Government of Hungary announcing its Steering Committee, which brings immediate withdrawal from the together 75 countries and hundreds of partnership. The Government of Hungary civil society organisations campaigning had been under review by OGP since July around the world for transparency of 2015 for concerns raised by civil society public life, in co-construction with civil organisations regarding their space to society, received a letter from the operate in the country. Government of Hungary announcing its immediate withdrawal from the partnership; this occurred while the Government of Hungary was under review by OGP since July 2015 for concerns raised by civil society organisations in particular regarding their space to operate in the country.

Or. fr

Amendment 90 Josef Weidenholzer, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

PE622.146v02-00 18/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20a) Between 2012 and 2017, Hungary operated its highly disturbing residency bond program that offered residence permit to some 20 000 people according to reports of investigative journalism. Those who acquired such bonds could maintain a permanent residence permit without limitation. The foreigners did not invest in the residency government bonds directly, but did so through designated intermediary companies with opaque ownership structures. These companies charge 40 000- 60000 euro service fees for their operations, and were hand-picked by the Economic Committee of the Parliament without public tender or legal oversight. Such conditions have created a hotbed for corruption.

Or. en

Amendment 91 Ana Gomes

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20a) Calls on the European Commission to immediately impose concrete measures reacting and getting redress to the investigation in Hungary, made by OLAF, which submitted financial and judicial recommendations to the European Commission and the Hungarian authorities, in view of the “serious irregularities” and “conflicts of interest” it found over street-lightning contracts granted to Elios Innovativ Zrt - a company at the time controlled by the

AM\1157114EN.docx 19/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Hungarian Prime-Minister’s son-in-law; whereas this and other investigations not only shed light on misuse of EU structural funds but also increase concerns on public contracts awarded to family members of the Prime Minister of Hungary;

Or. en

Amendment 92 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20a) In 2016 OLAF published its report where completed its investigation of the EUR 1.7 billion euro transport project in Hungary, in which the main participants were international companies. By using its cross-border powers, OLAF conducted investigations in Hungary and traced the links between projects and enterprises. The investigation showed very serious irregularities, as well as, possible fraud and corruption in the implementation of the projects. OLAF also launched an investigation into European Union- funded projects, run by a company controlled by the son-in-law of the Prime Minister - Viktor Orban. There is a treat that the tender could have been set up.

Or. en

Justification

Worth to mention the OLAF investigation published in the 2016 report. Over 80% of public investment in Hungary comes from the EU cohesion funds, Orbán’s son-in-law is one of the people who have gained EU funds. István Tiborcz, who married Orbán’s daughter, Ráhel, in 2013, was the owner of Elios Innovativ when he won contracts to supply cities with street lamps funded by the EU. The investigation showed that each lamp was purchased for as much as 156% of their value, and the funds for their purchase came from EU funds. Irregularities

PE622.146v02-00 20/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

in the financing of the Orban campaign were also shown.

Amendment 93 Louis Michel, Gérard Deprez, Nathalie Griesbeck, Sophia in 't Veld, Cecilia Wikström, Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Petr Ježek, Morten Helveg Petersen, Angelika Mlinar

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20a) According to the anti-corruption report published by the Commission in 20141 b, corruption is perceived as widespread (89%) in Hungary. According to the 2017 Corruption Perceptions Index published by Transparency International, Hungary has lost 10 points in six years, making it one of the lowest ranked states in the European Union. Hungary is one of the greatest recipients of EU funds and more than half of public investment comes from EU funds. Hungary, however, has refused to participate in the European Public Prosecutor's Office set up to combat infringements affecting the Union budget. ______1 b COM(2014) 38

Or. fr

Amendment 94 Sophia in 't Veld

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20a) As highlighted in its 2016 Annual Report, as well as in its answers to several letters from Members of the European Parliament1a, the European Central Bank

AM\1157114EN.docx 21/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

is closely monitoring the operations of the Hungarian Central Bank and its foundations, in particular of the Pallas Athene programmes. The 2017 ECB Annual Report mentions that some concerns have now been alleviated, nonetheless the ECB continues its monitoring. The ECB should not hesitate to initiate infringement proceedings for non-compliance with Article 123 TFEU banning monetary financing. ______1a See most recently the answer to the letter with reference QZ-016 dated 10 April 2018

Or. en

Amendment 95 Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo Castaldo

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20a) Hungary receives substantial funding through payments from the Structural and Cohesion Funds. In a 2016 report by the European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF), OLAF investigators found ‘serious irregularities’ in projects co- financed by the European Union, including projects managed by a company that was once co-owned by the son-in-law of Prime Minister Viktor Orban. This highlights dangerous conflicts of interest in the country and shows serious irregularities in the use of EU funds in the country and substantial fraud against the financial interests of the Union.

Or. it

PE622.146v02-00 22/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 96 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20a) The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has conducted 42 investigations in Hungary, 85% of which have resulted in judicial and financial recommendations, of which only 33% have been followed by the Hungarian national authorities. OLAF has in particular denounced ‘serious irregularities’, ‘conflicts of interest’ and referred to ‘an organised fraud scheme’ in the context of an investigation into the award of a public contract for street lamps financed by EU funds.

Or. fr

Amendment 97 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20b) Hungary has lost 19 points in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index since 2008, making the country the lowest ranked of the European Union Member States, while Hungary benefits from European funding amounting to 4.4% of its GDP or more than half of public investment.

Or. fr

Amendment 98 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan

AM\1157114EN.docx 23/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20b) Following a two-year investigation, OLAF has found “serious irregularities” around infrastructure projects co-financed by EU cohesion fund and connected to prime minister Viktor Orban’s son-in-law, indicating both high levels of corruption and conflict of interests.

Or. en

Amendment 99 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20c) Several indicators signal high levels of misconduct regarding EU funds. The share of contracts awarded after public procurement procedures that received only a single bid remains high at 36% in 2016. Hungary has the highest percentage in the Union of financial recommendations from OLAF in the areas of Structural Funds and Agriculture for the 2013-2016 period at 4,16% (which is 900% higher than the EU average). Hungary decided not to participate in the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 24/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 100 Josef Weidenholzer, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 20 d (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(20d) According to the Global Competitiveness Report 2017-2018 the high level of corruption was one of the most problematic factors for doing businesses in Hungary. Since 2008 Hungary has fallen by 19 points in the Corruption Perception Index.

Or. en

Amendment 101 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(21) In its judgment of 12 January deleted 2016, Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that the right to respect for private life was violated on account of the insufficient legal guarantees against unlawful secret surveillance for national security purposes, including related to the use of telecommunications. The amendment of the relevant legislation is necessary as a general measure. The execution of this judgment is, therefore, still pending.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 25/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 102 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(21) In its judgment of 12 January 2016, (21) In its judgment of 12 January 2016, Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary, the ECtHR Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that the right to respect for private found that the right to respect for private life was violated on account of the life was violated on account of the insufficient legal guarantees against insufficient legal guarantees against unlawful secret surveillance for national unlawful secret surveillance for national security purposes, including related to the security purposes, including related to the use of telecommunications. The use of telecommunications. Nevertheless, amendment of the relevant legislation is the case did not concern actual measures necessary as a general measure. The of surveillance but only the possibility of execution of this judgment is, therefore, the application of such measures sufficed still pending. to establish the applicants’ victim status within the meaning of the Convention. The amendment of the relevant legislation is necessary as a general measure and the need for amendments has not been called into question by the Hungarian Government either. Proposals for amendment of the Act on National Security Services are currently being discussed by the experts of the competent ministries of Hungary.

Or. en

Amendment 103 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 21

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 26/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

security purposes, including related to the security purposes, including related to the use of telecommunications. The use of telecommunications. The amendment of the relevant legislation is amendment of the relevant legislation is necessary as a general measure. The necessary as a general measure. A member execution of this judgment is, therefore, of the European Union ought to adhere to still pending. the protection of its citizens’ right to privacy to the highest degree possible. This judgment suggest that Hungary is not fully upholding its obligations to its citizens. The execution of this judgment is, therefore, still pending.

Or. en

Amendment 104 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(22) In the concluding observations of deleted 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that Hungary’s legal framework on secret surveillance for national security purposes allows for mass interception of communications and contains insufficient safeguards against arbitrary interference with the right to privacy. It was also concerned by the lack of provisions to ensure effective remedies in cases of abuse, and notification to the person concerned as soon as possible, without endangering the purpose of the restriction, after the termination of the surveillance measure.

Or. en

Amendment 105 Kinga Gál

AM\1157114EN.docx 27/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(22) In the concluding observations of 5 (22) In the concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that Committee expressed concerns that Hungary’s legal framework on secret Hungary’s legal framework on secret surveillance for national security purposes surveillance for national security purposes allows for mass interception of allows for mass interception of communications and contains insufficient communications and contains insufficient safeguards against arbitrary interference safeguards against arbitrary interference with the right to privacy. It was also with the right to privacy, whereas the concerned by the lack of provisions to concern on the possibility of “mass ensure effective remedies in cases of abuse, interception of communications” results and notification to the person concerned as from an error of fact and soon as possible, without endangering the misunderstanding of the Hungarian legal purpose of the restriction, after the situation. The already existing legal termination of the surveillance measure. infrastructure ensures independent external control of secret information gathering activities carried out by national security services. The appropriate legal tools provided by the Privacy Act empower the Data Protection Authority (DPA) to detect illegal secret information gathering and to take actions against the infringement. The data obtained during the DPA investigation – including national classified information – can be used by the DPA in the administrative proceedings for data protection, for example, to prohibit the unlawful processing of personal data, to order the deletion of the illegally processed data, to order the notification of the concerned data subjects in case the data controller refused to inform the affected person unlawfully, and also to impose a fine. The UN Human Rights Committee was also concerned by the lack of provisions to ensure effective remedies in cases of abuse, and notification to the person concerned as soon as possible, without endangering the purpose of the restriction, after the termination of the surveillance measure. The concluding observations of the Committee however, did not take into consideration the tool of

PE622.146v02-00 28/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

a subsequent revision by the National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information in cases of secret information collection.

Or. en

Amendment 106 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 22

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 107 Lívia Járóka

AM\1157114EN.docx 29/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 23

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(23) On 22 June 2015 the Venice (23) On 22 June 2015 the Venice Commission adopted its Opinion on Media Commission adopted its Opinion on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Services and on the Mass Media, Act CIV Services and on the Mass Media, Act CIV on the Freedom of the Press, and the on the Freedom of the Press, and the Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary, Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary, which called for several changes to the which called for several changes to the Press Act and the Media Act, in particular Press Act and the Media Act, in particular concerning the definition of “illegal media concerning the definition of “illegal media content”, the disclosure of journalistic content”, the disclosure of journalistic sources and sanctions on media outlets. sources and sanctions on media outlets. Similar concerns had been expressed in the Similar concerns had been expressed in the analysis commissioned by the Office of the analysis commissioned by the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media in February 2011, by the previous Media in February 2011, by the previous Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in his opinion on Hungary’s Human Rights in his opinion on Hungary’s media legislation in light of Council of media legislation in light of Council of Europe standards on freedom of the media Europe standards on freedom of the media of 25 February 2011, as well as by Council of 25 February 2011, as well as by Council of Europe experts on Hungarian media of Europe experts on Hungarian media legislation in their expertise of 11 May legislation in their expertise of 11 May 2012. Those concerns had been shared by 2012. Those concerns had been shared by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in the report following his Human Rights in the report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014. The Commissioner 16 December 2014. The Commissioner also mentioned the issues of concentration also mentioned the issues of concentration of media ownership and self-censorship of media ownership and self-censorship and indicated that the legal framework and indicated that the legal framework criminalising defamation should be criminalising defamation should be repealed. repealed. In contrast, all recent changes of media ownership have occurred within the regular framework of market economy and civil law dynamics. The functioning and considering the powerful legal and constitutional safeguards of media freedom in Hungary, there are no legal options to o limit media freedom at all.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 30/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 108 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 23

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(23) On 22 June 2015 the Venice (23) On 22 June 2015 the Venice Commission adopted its Opinion on Media Commission adopted its Opinion on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Services and on the Mass Media, Act CIV Services and on the Mass Media, Act CIV on the Freedom of the Press, and the on the Freedom of the Press, and the Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary, Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary, which called for several changes to the which called for several changes to the Press Act and the Media Act, in particular Press Act and the Media Act, in particular concerning the definition of “illegal media concerning the definition of “illegal media content”, the disclosure of journalistic content”, the disclosure of journalistic sources and sanctions on media outlets. sources and sanctions on media outlets. Similar concerns had been expressed in the Whereas in reality, Act CIV on the analysis commissioned by the Office of the Freedom of the Press, and the Legislation OSCE Representative on Freedom of the on Taxation of Advertisement Revenues Media in February 2011, by the previous of Mass Media as of July 2012 allows Council of Europe’s Commissioner for journalists to hide their information Human Rights in his opinion on Hungary’s sources in administrative and judicial media legislation in light of Council of procedures in line with European Europe standards on freedom of the media standards, following the decision of the of 25 February 2011, as well as by Council Hungarian Constitutional Court, as well of Europe experts on Hungarian media as the recommendations of the Council of legislation in their expertise of 11 May Europe. Similar concerns had been 2012. Those concerns had been shared by expressed in the analysis commissioned by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for the Office of the OSCE Representative on Human Rights in the report following his Freedom of the Media in February 2011, visit to Hungary, which was published on by the previous Council of Europe’s 16 December 2014. The Commissioner Commissioner for Human Rights in his also mentioned the issues of opinion on Hungary’s media legislation in concentration of media ownership and light of Council of Europe standards on self-censorship and indicated that the freedom of the media of 25 February 2011, legal framework criminalising defamation as well as by Council of Europe experts on should be repealed. Hungarian media legislation in their expertise of 11 May 2012. Those concerns had been addressed by the Hungarian Government, as a result of which the Council of Europe’s Secretary General has concluded in 2013 that the fundamental problems of Hungarian media legislation had been resolved.

AM\1157114EN.docx 31/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Or. en

Amendment 109 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 23

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(23) On 22 June 2015 the Venice (23) On 22 June 2015 the Venice Commission adopted its Opinion on Media Commission adopted its Opinion on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Legislation (Act CLXXXV on Media Services and on the Mass Media, Act CIV Services and on the Mass Media, Act CIV on the Freedom of the Press, and the on the Freedom of the Press, and the Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Legislation on Taxation of Advertisement Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary, Revenues of Mass Media) of Hungary, which called for several changes to the which called for several changes to the Press Act and the Media Act, in particular Press Act and the Media Act, in particular concerning the definition of “illegal media concerning the definition of “illegal media content”, the disclosure of journalistic content”, the disclosure of journalistic sources and sanctions on media outlets. sources and sanctions on media outlets. Similar concerns had been expressed in the Similar concerns had been expressed in the analysis commissioned by the Office of the analysis commissioned by the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media in February 2011, by the previous Media in February 2011; by the previous Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in his opinion on Hungary’s Human Rights in his opinion on Hungary’s media legislation in light of Council of media legislation in light of Council of Europe standards on freedom of the media Europe standards on freedom of the media of 25 February 2011, as well as by Council of 25 February 2011; as well as by Council of Europe experts on Hungarian media of Europe experts on Hungarian media legislation in their expertise of 11 May legislation in their expertise of 11 May 2012. Those concerns had been shared by 2012. These concerns had been shared by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in the report following his Human Rights in the report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014. The Commissioner 16 December 2014. The Commissioner also mentioned the issues of concentration also mentioned the issues of concentration of media ownership and self-censorship of media ownership and self-censorship and indicated that the legal framework and indicated that the legal framework criminalising defamation should be criminalising defamation should be repealed. repealed.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 32/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 110 Michał Boni, Heinz K. Becker, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel, Jaromír Štětina

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(23a) In its 2017 report on press freedom the Freedom House raised serious concerns about the freedom of the press in Hungary. This is due to independent media being extorted from the market, partly through acquisition of regional newspapers by government-affiliated owners and creation of government friendly private outlets, as well as selective awarding of advertising contracts by government and state-owned companies, which results in depriving independent media outlets from income. The limited advertisement market and extensive government spending on social advertising encourages media to avoid controversial subjects to maintain good relations with public and private advertisers.

Or. en

Amendment 111 Michał Boni, Heinz K. Becker, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel, Jaromír Štětina

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 23 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(23b) Both the Freedom House in its report of 2017 as well as Mertek Media Monitor observe that the government also seeks to control the media through selective allocation of radio broadcasting frequencies. This together with exerting their influence over public broadcasters and raising the profile of friendly private outlets deprives independent media from

AM\1157114EN.docx 33/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

having a fair access to the market.

Or. en

Amendment 112 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 24

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(24) In its Opinion of 22 June 2015 on (24) In its Opinion of 22 June 2015 on Media Legislation, the Venice Commission Media Legislation, the Venice Commission insisted on the need to change the rules insisted on the need to change the rules governing the election of the members of governing the election of the members of the Media Council to ensure fair the Media Council to ensure fair representation of socially significant representation of socially significant political and other groups and that the political and other groups and that the method of appointment and the position of method of appointment and the position of the Chairperson of the Media Council or the Chairperson of the Media Council or the President of the Media Authority the President of the Media Authority should be revisited in order to reduce the should be revisited in order to reduce the concentration of powers and secure concentration of powers and secure political neutrality; the Board of Trustees political neutrality; the Board of Trustees should also be reformed along those lines. should also be reformed along those lines. The Venice Commission also The Venice Commission also recommended the decentralisation of the recommended the decentralisation of the governance of public service media governance of public service media providers and that the National News providers and that the National News Agency not be the exclusive provider of Agency not be the exclusive provider of news for public service media providers. news for public service media providers. Similar concerns had been expressed in the Similar concerns had been expressed in the analysis commissioned by the Office of the analysis commissioned by the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media in February 2011, by the previous Media in February 2011, by the previous Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in his opinion on Hungary’s Human Rights in his opinion on Hungary’s media legislation in light of Council of media legislation in light of Council of Europe standards on freedom of the media Europe standards on freedom of the media of 25 February 2011, as well as by Council of 25 February 2011, as well as by Council of Europe experts on Hungarian media of Europe experts on Hungarian media legislation in their expertise of 11 May legislation in their expertise of 11 May 2012. Those concerns had also been shared 2012. Those concerns had also been shared by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in the report following for Human Rights in the report following his visit to Hungary, which was published his visit to Hungary, which was published

PE622.146v02-00 34/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

on 16 December 2014. on 16 December 2014. The Media Authority of Hungary however, is an autonomous regulatory agency subordinated solely to law, the President of which is appointed by the President of Hungary, while previously it was appointed by the Prime Minister. As a further step towards media independence, members of the Media Council (responsible for media contents and the freedom of press) are elected by a qualified majority of the Parliament for 9 years.

Or. en

Amendment 113 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 24 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(24a) As it was also noted by the Venice Commission in its Opinion of 22 June 2015, the Hungarian authorities responded to the criticisms from international bodies and NGOs. First, the Constitutional Court struck down certain norms contained in the “media package” as anti-constitutional and required the Government to make changes to the provisions pertaining, in particular, to the regulation of media content and protection of journalists’ sources. Second, in 2011-2012 the “media package” was subjected to revision. Yet, many domestic and international observers were not satisfied with those reforms. The amendments were said to be fragmentary and not addressing the key problems detected earlier. The Hungarian Government, on their side, defended their positions referring to the examples of similar regulations in other European states. The Venice Commission also

AM\1157114EN.docx 35/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

acknowledged the efforts of the Hungarian government, over the years, to improve on the original text of the Media Acts, in line with comments from various observers including the Council of Europe, and positively noted the willingness of the Hungarian authorities to continue the dialogue.

Or. en

Amendment 114 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 24 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(24b) It also has to be noted that the vast majority of the widely criticised rules of the Hungarian media legislation (e.g. illegal media content, balanced news coverage, sanctions, criminal law provisions on defamation) were not invented after 2010, but had already been existing since well before 2010 and substantially were in force also at the date of Hungary’s accession to the EU. In fact, the post-2010 revision of the Hungarian media laws dating back to 1995 and partly even 1986 aimed at better protecting the editorial and journalistic freedom of expression and the independence of the Media Authority than the previous laws did. In addition, as a consequence of continuous dialogues with international organisations and EU institutions, the Hungarian media legislation has even further been improved after its original adoption of 2010. In its statement of 29 January 2013, the Council of Europe Secretary General welcomed that discussions in the field of media have led to several important changes being agreed, notably concerning the mandate, nomination and appointment of the

PE622.146v02-00 36/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

President of the National Media Authority and President of the Media Council, as well as the regulation of TV and radio content. The Secretary General also added that the protection of journalistic sources had already been strengthened.

Or. en

Amendment 115 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 25

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(25) On 18 October 2012, the Venice deleted Commission adopted its Opinion on Act CXII of 2011 on Informational Self- Determination and Freedom of Information of Hungary. Despite the overall positive assessment, the Venice Commission identified the need for further improvements. However, following subsequent amendments to that law, the right to access government information has been significantly restricted further. Those amendments were criticised in the analysis commissioned by the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media in March 2016.

Or. en

Amendment 116 Michał Boni, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel, Jaromír Štětina

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 25

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(25) On 18 October 2012, the Venice (25) On 18 October 2012, the Venice

AM\1157114EN.docx 37/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Commission adopted its Opinion on Act Commission adopted its Opinion on Act CXII of 2011 on Informational Self- CXII of 2011 on Informational Self- Determination and Freedom of Information Determination and Freedom of Information of Hungary. Despite the overall positive of Hungary. Despite the overall positive assessment, the Venice Commission assessment, the Venice Commission identified the need for further identified the need for further improvements. However, following improvements. However, following subsequent amendments to that law, the subsequent amendments to that law, the right to access government information has right to access government information has been significantly restricted further. Those been significantly restricted further. Those amendments were criticised in the analysis amendments were criticised in the analysis commissioned by the Office of the OSCE commissioned by the Office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media in Representative on Freedom of the Media in March 2016. March 2016. Furthermore, in the report from the mission to assess the pre-election environment and the preparations for the elections, undertaken from 29 January to 1 February 2018, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights noted that the 2016 amendments to the Freedom of Information Act brought restrictive changes, including the introduction of high fees for the expenses associated with managing information requests, and new grounds for refusing to respond to requests.

Or. en

Amendment 117 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 25

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(25) On 18 October 2012, the Venice (25) On 18 October 2012, the Venice Commission adopted its Opinion on Act Commission adopted its Opinion on Act CXII of 2011 on Informational Self- CXII of 2011 on Informational Self- Determination and Freedom of Information Determination and Freedom of Information of Hungary. Despite the overall positive of Hungary. Despite the overall positive assessment, the Venice Commission assessment, the Venice Commission identified the need for further identified the need for further improvements. However, following improvements. However, following subsequent amendments to that law, the subsequent amendments to that law those right to access government information amendments were criticised in the analysis

PE622.146v02-00 38/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

has been significantly restricted further. commissioned by the Office of the OSCE Those amendments were criticised in the Representative on Freedom of the Media in analysis commissioned by the Office of the March 2016. The report acknowledges OSCE Representative on Freedom of the however, that the charges defined by the Media in March 2016. Hungarian Act for direct costs of information requests appeared to be entirely reasonable and reflect real costs. Hungary recognises the importance of access to public information as a means to provide for transparency in the government sector and the amendments to the Act strike a proper balance between the fundamental rights of data subjects and the interests and rights of data controllers, respectively.

Or. en

Amendment 118 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 25 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(25a) Notwithstanding, it is to be noted that the original text of the Act CXII of 2011 provided for wide-ranging possibilities for exercising the right of access to public information. The subsequent limitations thereto, aimed at striking a necessary and proportional balance between the rights of the applicants and the interests of data controllers, did not concern the essence of the right to access to information. As it was also acknowledged by the 2018 country report of the European Commission, the Data Protection Authority has taken a progressive position in transparency-related cases and so did courts as well as the Constitutional Court, who generally decide in favour of public access to information. This also shows that serious or systemic problems cannot be identified in the Hungarian legal

AM\1157114EN.docx 39/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

system.

Or. en

Amendment 119 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 25 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(25a) Hungary also lost 2 places in Reporters Without Borders' 2018 World Press Freedom Index (RSF), so that it now occupies 73rd place, compared to 40th place in 2011.

Or. fr

Amendment 120 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 26

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(26) In its statement adopted on 9 April (26) In its statement of preliminary 2018, the limited election observation findings and conclusions adopted on 9 mission of the OSCE Office for April 2018, the limited election Democratic Institutions and Human Rights observation mission of the OSCE Office for the 2018 Hungarian parliamentary for Democratic Institutions and Human elections concluded that access to Rights for the 2018 Hungarian information as well as the freedoms of the parliamentary elections concluded that media and association have been restricted, access to information as well as the including by recent legal changes and that freedoms of the media and association media coverage of the campaign was have been restricted, including by recent extensive, yet highly polarised and lacking legal changes and that media coverage of critical analysis. It further noted that the campaign was extensive, yet highly politicisation of the ownership, coupled polarised and lacking critical analysis. It with a restrictive legal framework, had a further noted that politicisation of the chilling effect on editorial freedom, ownership, coupled with a restrictive legal hindering voters’ access to pluralistic framework, had a chilling effect on information. editorial freedom, hindering voters’ access

PE622.146v02-00 40/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

to pluralistic information. By contrast, opposition media altogether reaches a considerably wider public in Hungary than pro-government media outlets. The ownership and political spectrum of Hungarian media is more diverse, and the freedom of the press is more prevalent than in most Western European countries; the diversity of the Hungarian media scenery was perhaps best demonstrated by the fact that most Hungarian media outlets actively campaigned against the Fidesz-KDNP alliance ahead of the 8th April elections.

Or. en

Amendment 121 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 26

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(26) In its statement adopted on 9 April (26) In its statement adopted on 9 April 2018, the limited election observation 2018, the limited election observation mission of the OSCE Office for mission of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Democratic Institutions and Human Rights for the 2018 Hungarian parliamentary for the 2018 Hungarian parliamentary elections concluded that access to elections concluded that access to information as well as the freedoms of the information as well as the freedoms of the media and association have been restricted, media and association have been restricted, including by recent legal changes and that including by recent legal changes and that media coverage of the campaign was media coverage of the campaign was extensive, yet highly polarised and lacking extensive, yet highly polarised and lacking critical analysis. It further noted that critical analysis. It further noted that politicisation of the ownership, coupled politicisation of the ownership, coupled with a restrictive legal framework, had a with a restrictive legal framework, had a chilling effect on editorial freedom, chilling effect on editorial freedom, hindering voters’ access to pluralistic hindering voters’ access to pluralistic information. information, which in turn contributed to a highly biased atmosphere, misleading the general population into favouring the ruling party. This has been concluded to be at odds with the international

AM\1157114EN.docx 41/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

standards.

Or. en

Amendment 122 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 26 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(26a) However, on the other hand, the preliminary findings and conclusions of the OSCE also noted within the context of the 2018 Hungarian parliamentary elections that fundamental rights and freedoms were respected overall, the campaign was animated, media coverage was extensive, voters had a wide range of political options, the public broadcaster fulfilled its mandate to provide free airtime to contestants, online media provided a platform for pluralistic, issue- oriented political debate. The OSCE also added that the electoral legal framework formed an adequate basis for democratic elections, the right to seek an effective remedy for electoral violations was inclusive and generally respected, and the election administration fulfilled its mandate in a professional and transparent manner and enjoyed overall confidence among stakeholders.

Or. en

Amendment 123 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 27

PE622.146v02-00 42/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(27) In its concluding observations of 5 (27) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about Committee expressed concerns about Hungary’s media laws and practices that Hungary’s media laws and practices that restrict freedom of opinion and expression. restrict freedom of opinion and expression. It was concerned that, following successive It was concerned that, following successive changes in the law, the current legislative changes in the law, the current legislative framework does not fully ensure an framework does not fully ensure an uncensored and unhindered press. It noted uncensored and unhindered press. It noted with concern that the Media Council and with concern that the Media Council and the Media Authority lack sufficient the Media Authority lack sufficient independence to perform their functions independence to perform their functions and have overbroad regulatory and and have overbroad regulatory and sanctioning powers. sanctioning powers. However, sanctions maybe imposed when media administration rules are violated and serious monetary penalties may only be levied in case of a recurring violation and the Media Council shall also take into account the principles of graduality and proportionality. The amount of the penalty is also limited and there are proper legal remedies against penalties.

Or. en

Amendment 124 Michał Boni, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 27 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(27a) On 7 May 2018 the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media expressed major concern over the denial of accreditation to several independent journalists, which prevented them from reporting from the inaugural meeting of Hungary’s new parliament. It was further noted that such event should not be used as a tool to curb the content of critical reporting and that such practice sets a bad

AM\1157114EN.docx 43/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

precedent for the new term of Hungary’s parliament.

Or. en

Amendment 125 Judith Sargentini

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 27 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(27a) On 13 April 2018, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media strongly condemned the publication of a list of more than 200 people by a Hungarian media outlet which claimed that over 2,000 people, including those listed by name, are allegedly working to “topple the government”. The list was published by the Hungarian magazine Figyelő on 11 April, and includes many journalists as well as other citizens.

Or. en

Amendment 126 Judith Sargentini

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 27 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(27b) On 4 May 2018, three journalists received a notification from the press office of the Hungarian parliament, informing them that their accreditation request to report from the inaugural meeting of Hungary’s new parliament on 8 May was denied. On 7 May 2018, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media expressed concern over the denial of accreditation to the journalists, noting

PE622.146v02-00 44/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

that the three media outlets are regarded as critical towards the work of the government.

Or. en

Amendment 127 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 28

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(28) On 6 October 2017, the Venice (28) On 6 October 2017, the Venice Commission adopted its Opinion on Act Commission adopted its Opinion on Act XXV of 4 April 2017 on the Amendment XXV of 4 April 2017 on the Amendment of Act CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary of Act CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary Education. It concluded that introducing Education. It concluded that introducing more stringent rules without very strong more stringent rules without very strong reasons, coupled with strict deadlines and reasons, coupled with strict deadlines and severe legal consequences, for foreign severe legal consequences, for foreign universities which are already established universities which are already established in Hungary and have been lawfully in Hungary and have been lawfully operating there for many years, appears operating there for many years, appears highly problematic from the standpoint of highly problematic from the standpoint of the rule of law and fundamental rights the rule of law and fundamental rights principles and guarantees. Those principles and guarantees. Those universities and their students are protected universities and their students are protected by domestic and international rules on by domestic and international rules on academic freedom, the freedom of academic freedom, the freedom of expression and assembly and the right to, expression and assembly and the right to, and freedom of, education. The Venice and freedom of, education. The Venice Commission recommended that the Commission recommended that the Hungarian authorities, in particular, ensure Hungarian authorities, in particular, ensure that new rules on requirement to have a that new rules on requirement to have a work permit do not disproportionally affect work permit do not disproportionally affect academic freedom and are applied in a academic freedom and are applied in a non-discriminatory and flexible manner, non-discriminatory and flexible manner, without jeopardising the quality and without jeopardising the quality and international character of education already international character of education already provided by existing universities. The provided by existing universities. The concerns about the Amendment of Act concerns about the Amendment of Act CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary Education have also been shared by the UN Education have also been shared by the UN Special Rapporteurs on the freedom of Special Rapporteurs on the freedom of opinion and expression, on the rights to opinion and expression, on the rights to

AM\1157114EN.docx 45/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of peaceful assembly and association and on cultural rights in their association and on cultural rights in their statement of 11 April 2017. In the statement of 11 April 2017. In the concluding observations of 5 April 2018, concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee noted the UN Human Rights Committee noted the lack of a sufficient justification for the the lack of a sufficient justification for the imposition of such constraints on the imposition of such constraints on the freedom of thought, expression and freedom of thought, expression and association, as well as academic freedom. association, as well as academic freedom. The criticised legislative amendments however do not affect the freedom of thought or expression, or artistic and academic freedom. The European Commission itself has also stated that it is not without precedent that Member States of the EU enact special legal requirements for institutions of higher education with headquarters in a foreign country; Sweden, the Czech Republic, Poland, the Netherlands and Greece, or multiple states of Germany have much stricter rules in many aspects than the new Hungarian law.

Or. en

Amendment 128 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 28

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 46/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

principles and guarantees. Those opinion also acknowledged that some universities and their students are states do not allow foreign universities to protected by domestic and international operate at all, furthermore, that Hungary rules on academic freedom, the freedom has the right to create and review of expression and assembly and the right regulation concerning institutions of to, and freedom of, education. The Venice higher education operating within her Commission recommended that the territory. It concluded that introducing Hungarian authorities, in particular, more stringent rules without very strong ensure that new rules on requirement to reasons, coupled with strict deadlines and have a work permit do not severe legal consequences, for foreign disproportionally affect academic freedom universities which are already established and are applied in a non-discriminatory in Hungary and have been lawfully and flexible manner, without jeopardising operating there for many years, appears the quality and international character of highly problematic from the standpoint of education already provided by existing the rule of law and fundamental rights universities. The concerns about the principles and guarantees. At the same Amendment of Act CCIV of 2011 on time, legislation may not distinguish National Tertiary Education have also between past and future institutions, but been shared by the UN Special an appropriate deadline must be set for Rapporteurs on the freedom of opinion fulfilling the conditions. Not only would it and expression, on the rights to freedom be discriminatory if the introduced system of peaceful assembly and association and of conditionalities would apply only for on cultural rights in their statement of 11 new institutions, but would also actually April 2017. In the concluding prevent transparency. observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee noted the lack of a sufficient justification for the imposition of such constraints on the freedom of thought, expression and association, as well as academic freedom.

Or. en

Amendment 129 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 29

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 47/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

education institutions affected, in recommendation of the Presidency of the particular, the Central European Hungarian Rectors’ Conference; the University, are still ongoing, while the Venice Commission has explicitly legal limbo for foreign universities welcomed the prolongation in its related remains. opinion. Negotiations between the Hungarian Government and foreign higher education institutions affected, in particular, the Central European University, are still ongoing however, the swift and smooth conclusion of the agreements between Hungary and her Thai, Chinese and – with one exception – American partners demonstrates that the new legislation does not impose impossible conditions on foreign higher education institutions and that the amendment does not jeopardise the freedom of higher education..

Or. en

Amendment 130 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Kati Piri, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 29

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(29) On 17 October 2017, the Hungarian (29) On 17 October 2017, the Hungarian Parliament extended the deadline for Parliament extended the deadline for foreign universities operating in the foreign universities operating in the country to meet the new criteria to 1 country to meet the new criteria to 1 January 2019. Negotiations between the January 2019. Negotiations between the Hungarian Government and foreign higher Hungarian Government and foreign higher education institutions affected, in education institutions affected, in particular, the Central European particular, the Central European University, are still ongoing, while the University, are still ongoing, while the legal limbo for foreign universities legal limbo for foreign universities remains. remains. Notes that the Central European University complied with the new requirements imposed by the Amendment of Act CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary Education in due time, but the Hungarian

PE622.146v02-00 48/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Government is reluctant to sign the reached agreement.

Or. en

Amendment 131 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 30

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(30) On 7 December 2017, the (30) On 7 December 2017, the Commission decided to refer Hungary to Commission decided to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice of the European Union the Court of Justice of the European Union on the grounds that the Amendment of Act on the grounds that the Amendment of Act CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary Education disproportionally restricts Union Education disproportionally restricts Union and non-Union universities in their and non-Union universities in their operations and that the Act needs to be operations and that the Act needs to be brought back in line with Union law. The brought back in line with Union law. In the Commission found that the new course of the infringement procedure, the legislation runs counter to the right of Commission imposed far shorter academic freedom, the right to education deadlines on Hungary than the decade- and the freedom to conduct a business as long standard and rejected the Hungarian provided by the Charter of Fundamental requests for the extension of the deadline, Rights of the European Union (the seriously undermining Hungary’s right to “Charter”) and the Union’s legal defence. The Commission did not justify obligations under international trade law. the shorter than usual deadlines, merely referred to the ‘specific nature of the case’ in its appeal, without explaining exactly what the term refers to. The procedure however is still pending and ultimately the European Court of Justice (ECJ) is competent to establish whether or not Hungary infringed EU law. It would contradict the basic legal and constitutional principles to prejudge the decision of the Court of Justice.

Or. en

Amendment 132 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

AM\1157114EN.docx 49/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 31

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(31) In 2011, the Hungarian deleted Parliament adopted Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, Denominations and Religious Communities of Hungary. The Act deprived many religious organisations of legal personality and reduced the number of legally recognised churches in Hungary to 14. On 16 December 2011 the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights shared his concerns about this Act in a letter sent to the Hungarian authorities. In February 2012, responding to international pressure, the Hungarian Parliament expanded the number of recognised churches to 31. On 19 March 2012 the Venice Commission adopted its Opinion on Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, Denominations and Religious Communities of Hungary, where it indicated that the Act sets a range of requirements that are excessive and based on arbitrary criteria with regard to the recognition of a church, that the Act has led to a deregistration process of hundreds of previously lawfully recognised churches and that the Act induces, to some extent, an unequal and even discriminatory treatment of religious beliefs and communities, depending on whether they are recognised or not.

Or. en

Amendment 133 Kinga Gál

PE622.146v02-00 50/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 31

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(31) In 2011, the Hungarian Parliament (31) In 2011, the Hungarian Parliament adopted Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to adopted Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and Freedom of Conscience and Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, the Legal Status of Churches, Denominations and Religious Denominations and Religious Communities of Hungary. The Act Communities of Hungary. The Act deprived many religious organisations of reviewed the legal personality of many legal personality and reduced the number religious organisations and reduced the of legally recognised churches in Hungary number of legally recognised churches in to 14. On 16 December 2011 the Council Hungary to 14 in line with the practices of of Europe Commissioner for Human EU Member States, the majority of which Rights shared his concerns about this Act make a clear difference between the legal in a letter sent to the Hungarian authorities. status of historic churches and the status In February 2012, responding to of other denominations. On 16 December international pressure, the Hungarian 2011 the Council of Europe Commissioner Parliament expanded the number of for Human Rights shared his concerns recognised churches to 31. On 19 March about this Act in a letter sent to the 2012 the Venice Commission adopted its Hungarian authorities. In February 2012 Opinion on Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right the Hungarian Parliament expanded the to Freedom of Conscience and Religion number of recognised churches to 31. On and the Legal Status of Churches, 19 March 2012 the Venice Commission Denominations and Religious adopted its Opinion on Act CCVI of 2011 Communities of Hungary, where it on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and indicated that the Act sets a range of Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, requirements that are excessive and based Denominations and Religious on arbitrary criteria with regard to the Communities of Hungary, where it recognition of a church, that the Act has indicated that the Act sets a range of led to a deregistration process of hundreds requirements that are excessive and based of previously lawfully recognised churches on arbitrary criteria with regard to the and that the Act induces, to some extent, an recognition of a church, that the Act has unequal and even discriminatory treatment led to a deregistration process of hundreds of religious beliefs and communities, of previously lawfully recognised churches depending on whether they are recognised and that the Act induces, to some extent, an or not. unequal and even discriminatory treatment of religious beliefs and communities, depending on whether they are recognised or not. By contrast, the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights recognises the right of states to create various legal categories for religious communities, with the only prerequisite that some kind of a legal form shall be available without obstacles.

AM\1157114EN.docx 51/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Or. en

Amendment 134 Josef Weidenholzer, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 31

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(31) In 2011, the Hungarian Parliament (31) In 2011, the Hungarian Parliament adopted Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to adopted Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and Freedom of Conscience and Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, the Legal Status of Churches, Denominations and Religious Denominations and Religious Communities of Hungary. The Act Communities of Hungary. The Act, which deprived many religious organisations of was adopted on 30 December 2011 and legal personality and reduced the number entered into force on 1 January 2012, of legally recognised churches in Hungary deprived many religious organisations of to 14. On 16 December 2011 the Council legal personality and reduced the number of Europe Commissioner for Human of legally recognised churches in Hungary Rights shared his concerns about this Act to 14. On 16 December 2011 the Council in a letter sent to the Hungarian authorities. of Europe Commissioner for Human In February 2012, responding to Rights shared his concerns about this Act international pressure, the Hungarian in a letter sent to the Hungarian authorities. Parliament expanded the number of In February 2012, responding to recognised churches to 31. On 19 March international pressure, the Hungarian 2012 the Venice Commission adopted its Parliament expanded the number of Opinion on Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right recognised churches to 31. On 19 March to Freedom of Conscience and Religion 2012 the Venice Commission adopted its and the Legal Status of Churches, Opinion on Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right Denominations and Religious to Freedom of Conscience and Religion Communities of Hungary, where it and the Legal Status of Churches, indicated that the Act sets a range of Denominations and Religious requirements that are excessive and based Communities of Hungary, where it on arbitrary criteria with regard to the indicated that the Act sets a range of recognition of a church, that the Act has requirements that are excessive and based led to a deregistration process of hundreds on arbitrary criteria with regard to the of previously lawfully recognised churches recognition of a church, that the Act has and that the Act induces, to some extent, an led to a deregistration process of hundreds unequal and even discriminatory treatment of previously lawfully recognised churches of religious beliefs and communities, and that the Act induces, to some extent, an depending on whether they are recognised unequal and even discriminatory treatment or not. of religious beliefs and communities, depending on whether they are recognised

PE622.146v02-00 52/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

or not.

Or. en

Amendment 135 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 31

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(31) In 2011, the Hungarian Parliament (31) In 2011, the Hungarian Parliament adopted Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to adopted Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and Freedom of Conscience and Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, the Legal Status of Churches, Denominations and Religious Denominations and Religious Communities of Hungary. The Act Communities of Hungary. The Act deprived many religious organisations of deprived many religious organisations of legal personality and reduced the number legal personality and reduced the number of legally recognised churches in Hungary of legally recognised churches in Hungary to 14. On 16 December 2011 the Council to 14. On 16 December 2011, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights shared his concerns about this Act Rights shared his concerns about this Act in a letter sent to the Hungarian authorities. in a letter sent to the Hungarian authorities. In February 2012, responding to In February 2012, responding to international pressure, the Hungarian international pressure, the Hungarian Parliament expanded the number of Parliament expanded the number of recognised churches to 31. On 19 March recognised churches to 31. On 19 March 2012 the Venice Commission adopted its 2012, the Venice Commission adopted its Opinion on Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right Opinion on Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and the Legal Status of Churches, and the Legal Status of Churches, Denominations and Religious Denominations and Religious Communities of Hungary, where it Communities of Hungary, where it indicated that the Act sets a range of indicated that the Act sets a range of requirements that are excessive and based requirements that are excessive and based on arbitrary criteria with regard to the on arbitrary criteria with regard to the recognition of a church, that the Act has recognition of a church. Furthermore, it led to a deregistration process of hundreds indicated that the Act has led to a of previously lawfully recognised churches deregistration process of hundreds of and that the Act induces, to some extent, an previously lawfully recognised churches unequal and even discriminatory treatment and that the Act induces, to some extent, an of religious beliefs and communities, unequal and even discriminatory treatment depending on whether they are recognised of religious beliefs and communities, or not. depending on whether they are recognised

AM\1157114EN.docx 53/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

or not.

Or. en

Amendment 136 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 32

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(32) In February 2013, Hungary’s deleted Constitutional Court ruled that the deregistration of recognised churches had been unconstitutional. Responding to the Constitutional Court’s decision, the Hungarian Parliament amended the Fundamental Law in March 2013. In June and September 2013, the Hungarian Parliament amended Act CCVI of 2011 to create a two-tiered classification consisting of “religious communities” and “incorporated churches”. In September 2013, the Hungarian Parliament also amended the Fundamental Law explicitly to grant itself the authority to select religious communities for “cooperation” with the state in the service of “public interest activities”.

Or. en

Amendment 137 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 32

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 54/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Constitutional Court’s decision, the Constitutional Court’s decision, the Hungarian Parliament amended the Hungarian Parliament amended the Fundamental Law in March 2013. In June Fundamental Law in March 2013. In June and September 2013, the Hungarian and September 2013, the Hungarian Parliament amended Act CCVI of 2011 to Parliament amended Act CCVI of 2011 to create a two-tiered classification consisting create a two-tiered classification consisting of “religious communities” and of “religious communities” and “incorporated churches”. In September “incorporated churches”. In September 2013, the Hungarian Parliament also 2013, the Hungarian Parliament also amended the Fundamental Law explicitly amended the Fundamental Law explicitly to grant itself the authority to select to grant itself the authority to select religious communities for “cooperation” religious communities for “cooperation” with the state in the service of “public with the state in the service of “public interest activities”. interest activities”. The provision assures the state the possibility to grant to organisations conducting religious activities special status as ‘church’. The religious community recognised by the Parliament as ‘church’ functions as a public law entity, whereas the ‘organisation conducting religious activity’ is a private law association. The rules of granting the status of a public law entity are more stringent than those on private law entities. The majority of Member States makes a clear difference between the legal status of historic churches and the status of other denominations and there are various legal forms for this distinction. In several Member States some churches are listed in the constitution, while others are subject to separate regulations or different ‘sui generis’ statuses provided for them. The case-law of the ECtHR recognises the right of states to create various legal categories for religious communities, the basic prerequisite of which is that some kind of a legal form shall be available without obstacles.

Or. en

Amendment 138 Michał Boni, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel

AM\1157114EN.docx 55/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 32

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(32) In February 2013, Hungary’s (32) In February 2013, Hungary’s Constitutional Court ruled that the Constitutional Court ruled that the deregistration of recognised churches had deregistration of recognised churches had been unconstitutional. Responding to the been unconstitutional. Responding to the Constitutional Court’s decision, the Constitutional Court’s decision, the Hungarian Parliament amended the Hungarian Parliament amended the Fundamental Law in March 2013. In June Fundamental Law in March 2013. In June and September 2013, the Hungarian and September 2013, the Hungarian Parliament amended Act CCVI of 2011 to Parliament amended Act CCVI of 2011 to create a two-tiered classification consisting create a two-tiered classification consisting of “religious communities” and of “religious communities” and “incorporated churches”. In September “incorporated churches”. In September 2013, the Hungarian Parliament also 2013, the Hungarian Parliament also amended the Fundamental Law explicitly amended the Fundamental Law explicitly to grant itself the authority to select to grant itself the authority to select religious communities for “cooperation” religious communities for “cooperation” with the state in the service of “public with the state in the service of “public interest activities”. interest activities”, in practice giving itself a discretionary power to recognise a religious organisation, with a two-thirds vote, rather than relying on decisions of the administration or the courts.

Or. en

Amendment 139 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 33

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(33) In its judgment of 8 April 2014, deleted Magyar Keresztény Mennonita Egyház and Others v. Hungary, the ECtHR ruled that Hungary had violated freedom of association, read in the light of freedom of conscience and religion. The execution of that judgment is still pending.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 56/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 140 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 33

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(33) In its judgment of 8 April 2014, (33) In its judgment of 8 April 2014, Magyar Keresztény Mennonita Egyház and Magyar Keresztény Mennonita Egyház and Others v. Hungary, the ECtHR ruled that Others v. Hungary, the ECtHR ruled that Hungary had violated freedom of Hungary had violated freedom of association, read in the light of freedom of association, read in the light of freedom of conscience and religion. The execution of conscience and religion. The execution of that judgment is still pending. that judgment is still pending. The Constitutional Court of Hungary found that certain rules governing the conditions of recognition as a church were unconstitutional and ordered the legislature to bring the relevant rules in line with the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights. The relevant Act was accordingly submitted to the Parliament in December 2015 but it did not obtain the necessary majority; however, just satisfaction has been paid to the applicants either on the basis of friendly settlements or pursuant to the judgments of the Court.

Or. en

Amendment 141 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 33 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(33a) The adoption of Act CCVI of 2011 and all the subsequent amendments thereto had the intention to fully ensure both the individual and collective freedom of religion, in accordance with the

AM\1157114EN.docx 57/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Fundamental Law, longstanding Hungarian legal traditions and international standards. The differentiation between legal status of different categories of religious communities did not aim at substantially affecting their freedom of religion, but only intended to express the differences in the duration and social support of their activities as well as in their ability to participate in fulfilling tasks of public interest. Such a differentiation is not unique in the European Union; several Member States have different categories of religious communities, some of them based on a ministerial or a parliamentary decision (e.g. in Austria, Belgium, Spain or Lithuania), some others by legislative means or even specifically at constitutional level (e.g. in Greece, Malta, Denmark, Finland, United Kingdom).

Or. en

Amendment 142 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 34

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(34) On 9 July 2014, the Council of deleted Europe Commissioner for Human Rights indicated in his letter to the Hungarian authorities that he was concerned about the stigmatising rhetoric used by politicians questioning the legitimacy of NGO work in the context of audits which had been carried out by the Hungarian Government Control Office concerning NGOs which were beneficiaries of the Norwegian Civil Fund. On 8-16 February 2016, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders visited Hungary and indicated in his report that significant challenges stem

PE622.146v02-00 58/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

from the existing legal framework governing the exercise of fundamental freedoms, such as the rights to freedoms of opinion and expression, and of peaceful assembly and of association, and that legislation pertaining to national security and migration may also have a restrictive impact on the civil society environment.

Or. en

Amendment 143 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 34

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(34) On 9 July 2014, the Council of (34) On 9 July 2014, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Europe Commissioner for Human Rights indicated in his letter to the Hungarian indicated in his letter to the Hungarian authorities that he was concerned about the authorities that he was concerned about the stigmatising rhetoric used by politicians stigmatising rhetoric used by politicians questioning the legitimacy of NGO work in questioning the legitimacy of NGO work in the context of audits which had been the context of audits which had been carried out by the Hungarian Government carried out by the Hungarian Government Control Office concerning NGOs which Control Office concerning NGOs which were beneficiaries of the Norwegian Civil were beneficiaries of the Norwegian Civil Fund. On 8-16 February 2016, the UN Fund. The investigations in question did Special Rapporteur on the situation of not at all concern the activities of the human rights defenders visited Hungary organisations, but these were and indicated in his report that significant accountability measures regarding the challenges stem from the existing legal financial operations. The Hungarian framework governing the exercise of Government signed an agreement with the fundamental freedoms, such as the rights to Norway grants as a result of which the freedoms of opinion and expression, and of payments of the grants continue to peaceful assembly and of association, and operate undisturbed, complying with the that legislation pertaining to national transparency criteria of the rule of law. security and migration may also have a On 8-16 February 2016, the UN Special restrictive impact on the civil society Rapporteur on the situation of human environment. rights defenders visited Hungary and indicated in his report that significant challenges stem from the existing legal framework governing the exercise of fundamental freedoms, such as the rights to

AM\1157114EN.docx 59/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

freedoms of opinion and expression, and of peaceful assembly and of association, and that legislation pertaining to national security and migration may also have a restrictive impact on the civil society environment. However, tens of thousands of organisations participate in tenders run by the Trust for National Cooperation, and both the number of supported projects and the amount of funding has increased in Hungary compared to previous years.

Or. en

Amendment 144 Michał Boni, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel, Jaromír Štětina

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 34

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(34) On 9 July 2014, the Council of (34) On 9 July 2014, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Europe Commissioner for Human Rights indicated in his letter to the Hungarian indicated in his letter to the Hungarian authorities that he was concerned about the authorities that he was concerned about the stigmatising rhetoric used by politicians stigmatising rhetoric used by politicians questioning the legitimacy of NGO work in questioning the legitimacy of NGO work in the context of audits which had been the context of audits which had been carried out by the Hungarian Government carried out by the Hungarian Government Control Office concerning NGOs which Control Office concerning NGOs which were beneficiaries of the Norwegian Civil were operators and beneficiaries of the Fund. On 8-16 February 2016, the UN Norwegian Civil Fund. On 8-16 February Special Rapporteur on the situation of 2016, the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights defenders visited Hungary situation of human rights defenders visited and indicated in his report that significant Hungary and indicated in his report that challenges stem from the existing legal significant challenges stem from the framework governing the exercise of existing legal framework governing the fundamental freedoms, such as the rights to exercise of fundamental freedoms, such as freedoms of opinion and expression, and of the rights to freedoms of opinion and peaceful assembly and of association, and expression, and of peaceful assembly and that legislation pertaining to national of association, and that legislation security and migration may also have a pertaining to national security and restrictive impact on the civil society migration may also have a restrictive environment. impact on the civil society environment.

PE622.146v02-00 60/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Or. en

Amendment 145 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 34 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(34a) On 12 April 2018, the weekly Figyelo published a list of 200 names of personalities accused of belonging to ‘a network of speculators in the service of George Soros’; Prime Minister Viktor Orban had stated during the election campaign that he had in his possession a list of 2000 persons paid by George Soros; these announcements have created a climate of mistrust towards a certain number of civil society players which has the capacity to undermine freedom of expression, freedom of association and academic freedom in Hungary.

Or. fr

Amendment 146 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 35

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(35) In April 2017 a draft law on the deleted Transparency of Organisations Receiving Support from Abroad was introduced before the Hungarian Parliament. On 26 April 2017, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights addressed a letter to the Speaker of the Hungarian National Assembly noting that the draft law was introduced against the background of continued antagonistic

AM\1157114EN.docx 61/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

rhetoric from certain members of the ruling coalition, who publicly labelled some NGOs as “foreign agents” based on the source of their funding and questioned their legitimacy. Similar concerns have been mentioned in the statement of 7 March 2017 of the President of the Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe and President of the Expert Council on NGO Law, as well as in the Opinion of 24 April 2017 prepared by the Expert Council on NGO Law, and the statement of 15 May 2017 by the UN Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights defenders and on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

Or. en

Amendment 147 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 35

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(35) In April 2017 a draft law on the (35) In April 2017 a draft law on the Transparency of Organisations Receiving Transparency of Organisations Receiving Support from Abroad was introduced Support from Abroad was introduced before the Hungarian Parliament. On 26 before the Hungarian Parliament. On 26 April 2017, the Council of Europe April 2017, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Commissioner for Human Rights addressed a letter to the Speaker of the addressed a letter to the Speaker of the Hungarian National Assembly noting that Hungarian National Assembly noting that the draft law was introduced against the the draft law was introduced against the background of continued antagonistic background of continued antagonistic rhetoric from certain members of the ruling rhetoric from certain members of the ruling coalition, who publicly labelled some coalition, who publicly labelled some NGOs as “foreign agents” based on the NGOs as “foreign agents” based on the source of their funding and questioned source of their funding and questioned their legitimacy. Similar concerns have their legitimacy; the term “foreign agents” been mentioned in the statement of 7 is however absent from the law and the March 2017 of the President of the Venice Commission stated in its opinion Conference of INGOs of the Council of that the term ‘organisation receiving

PE622.146v02-00 62/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Europe and President of the Expert Council support from abroad’ is neutral and on NGO Law, as well as in the Opinion of descriptive. The Parliamentary Assembly 24 April 2017 prepared by the Expert of the Council of Europe has also Council on NGO Law, and the statement of acknowledged in its resolution 2162 15 May 2017 by the UN Special (2017) that the Hungarian law did not Rapporteurs on the situation of human include some of the controversial term rights defenders and on the promotion and ‘foreign agent’ or the specific and thus protection of the right to freedom of discriminatory reference to NGOs which opinion and expression. defend human rights, and that it provided for a judicial rather than administrative review. Consequently, it can be acknowledged that the overall purpose of the Act is in line with relevant international guidelines, including those elaborated under the auspices of the Council of Europe. Similar concerns have been mentioned in the statement of 7 March 2017 of the President of the Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe and President of the Expert Council on NGO Law, as well as in the Opinion of 24 April 2017 prepared by the Expert Council on NGO Law, and the statement of 15 May 2017 by the UN Special Rapporteurs on the situation of human rights defenders and on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. According to the OSCE/ODIHR and Venice Commission Guidelines on Freedom of Association as well as the expert opinion of the Venice Commission on the issue, the freedom to seek, receive and use resources can be subject to requirements related to the prevention of money laundering or terrorism and such resources may also legitimately be subject to reporting and transparency requirements.

Or. en

Amendment 148 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 36

AM\1157114EN.docx 63/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(36) On 13 June 2017, the Hungarian deleted Parliament adopted the draft law with several amendments. In its Opinion of 20 June 2017, the Venice Commission recognised that some of those amendments represented an important improvement but at the same time some other concerns were not addressed and the amendments did not suffice to alleviate the concerns that the law would cause a disproportionate and unnecessary interference with the freedoms of association and expression, the right to privacy, and the prohibition of discrimination. In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee noted the lack of a sufficient justification for the imposition of those requirements, which appeared to be part of an attempt to discredit certain NGOs, including NGOs dedicated to the protection of human rights in Hungary.

Or. en

Amendment 149 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 36

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(36) On 13 June 2017, the Hungarian (36) On 13 June 2017, the Hungarian Parliament adopted the draft law with Parliament adopted the draft law with several amendments. In its Opinion of 20 several amendments. In its Opinion of 20 June 2017, the Venice Commission June 2017, the Venice Commission recognised that some of those amendments recognised that some of those amendments represented an important improvement but represented an important improvement but at the same time some other concerns were at the same time some other concerns were not addressed and the amendments did not not addressed and the amendments did not suffice to alleviate the concerns that the suffice to alleviate the concerns that the law would cause a disproportionate and law would cause a disproportionate and

PE622.146v02-00 64/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

unnecessary interference with the freedoms unnecessary interference with the freedoms of association and expression, the right to of association and expression, the right to privacy, and the prohibition of privacy, and the prohibition of discrimination. In its concluding discrimination. In 2013 however, the observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Venice Commission explicitly Human Rights Committee noted the lack of acknowledged that there may be various a sufficient justification for the imposition reasons for a state to restrict foreign of those requirements, which appeared to funding; including the prevention of be part of an attempt to discredit certain money-laundering and terrorist financing NGOs, including NGOs dedicated to the and that it is justified to require the protection of human rights in Hungary. utmost transparency in matters pertaining to foreign funding. Consequently, ensuring transparency is a legitimate aim and the Hungarian law implements no restriction on funding whatsoever. In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee noted the lack of a sufficient justification for the imposition of those requirements, which appeared to be part of an attempt to discredit certain NGOs, including NGOs dedicated to the protection of human rights in Hungary.

Or. en

Amendment 150 Soraya Post, Josef Weidenholzer

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 36

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 65/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

discrimination. In its concluding discrimination. In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee noted the lack of Human Rights Committee noted the lack of a sufficient justification for the imposition a sufficient justification for the imposition of those requirements, which appeared to of those requirements, which appeared to be part of an attempt to discredit certain be part of an attempt to discredit certain NGOs, including NGOs dedicated to the NGOs, including NGOs dedicated to the protection of human rights in Hungary. protection of human rights in Hungary and those working to promote the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants.

Or. en

Amendment 151 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 37

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(37) On 7 December 2017, the (37) On 7 December 2017, the Commission decided to start legal Commission decided to start legal proceedings against Hungary for failing to proceedings against Hungary for failing to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty fulfil its obligations under the Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital, provisions on the free movement of capital, due to provisions in the NGO Law which due to provisions in the NGO Law which indirectly discriminate and indirectly discriminate and disproportionately restrict donations from disproportionately restrict donations from abroad to civil society organisations. In abroad to civil society organisations. In addition, the Commission concluded that addition, the Commission concluded that Hungary had violated the right to freedom Hungary had violated the right to freedom of association and the rights to protection of association and the rights to protection of private life and personal data enshrined of private life and personal data enshrined in the Charter, read in conjunction with the in the Charter, read in conjunction with the Treaty provisions on the free movement of Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital. capital. According the European Court of Justice, a prior declaration may be a proportionate measure since unlike prior authorisation it does not entail the suspension of transactions, but still allows national authorities to exercise effective supervision in order to prevent infringements. The Hungarian legislation applies an even more moderate tool, since merely an ex post declaration shall be produced which is by definition incapable

PE622.146v02-00 66/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

of restricting the movement of capital.

Or. en

Amendment 152 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 37

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(37) On 7 December 2017, the (37) On 7 December 2017, the Commission decided to start legal Commission decided to start legal proceedings against Hungary for failing to proceedings against Hungary for failing to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty fulfil its obligations under the Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital, provisions on the free movement of capital, due to provisions in the NGO Law which due to provisions in the NGO Law which, indirectly discriminate and in the view of the Commission, indirectly disproportionately restrict donations from discriminate and disproportionately restrict abroad to civil society organisations. In donations from abroad to civil society addition, the Commission concluded that organisations. In addition, the Commission Hungary had violated the right to freedom alleged that Hungary had violated the right of association and the rights to protection to freedom of association and the rights to of private life and personal data enshrined protection of private life and personal data in the Charter, read in conjunction with the enshrined in the Charter, read in Treaty provisions on the free movement of conjunction with the Treaty provisions on capital. the free movement of capital. This procedure is still pending and ultimately and exclusively the European Court of Justice is competent to establish whether or not Hungary infringed EU law pursuant to Article 19(3)a of TEU and Article 260(1) of TFEU and any statement assuming the violation of EU law until the final decision is a mere presumption.

Or. en

Amendment 153 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 37

AM\1157114EN.docx 67/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(37) On 7 December 2017, the (37) On 7 December 2017, the Commission decided to start legal Commission decided to start legal proceedings against Hungary for failing to proceedings against Hungary for failing to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty fulfil its obligations under the Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital, provisions on the free movement of capital, due to provisions in the NGO Law which due to provisions in the NGO Law which indirectly discriminate and indirectly discriminate and disproportionately restrict donations from disproportionately restrict donations from abroad to civil society organisations. In abroad to civil society organisations. In addition, the Commission concluded that addition, the Commission concluded that Hungary had violated the right to freedom Hungary had violated the right to freedom of association and the rights to protection of association and the rights to protection of private life and personal data enshrined of private life and personal data enshrined in the Charter, read in conjunction with the in the Charter, read in conjunction with the Treaty provisions on the free movement of Treaty provisions on the free movement of capital. capital, defined in Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and art. 26 points 2 and 63 of the Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Or. en

Amendment 154 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 37 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(37a) On 28 February 2018, the Budapest Metropolitan Court ruled at first instance that the Prime Minister's Office had violated the right of the Hungarian Helsinki Committee (HHC) to a good reputation in the ‘Stop Soros’ national consultation questionnaire. The Court ruled that the statements in question 5 regarding the HHC were false and cast the HHC in a misleading light. The Court asked the Hungarian government to apologise and pay HUF 2

PE622.146v02-00 68/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

million in damages to the HHC.

Or. fr

Amendment 155 József Szájer, Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(38) In February 2018, a legislative deleted package consisting of three draft laws, also known as the “Stop-Soros Package” (T/19776, T/19775, T/19774), was presented by the Hungarian Government. On 14 February 2018, the President of the Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe and President of the Expert Council on NGO Law made a statement indicating that the package does not comply with the freedom of association, particularly for NGOs which deal with migrants. On 15 February 2018, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights expressed similar concerns. In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that by alluding to the “survival of the nation” and protection of citizens and culture, and by linking the work of NGOs to an alleged international conspiracy, the legislative package would stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to carry out their important activities in support of human rights and, in particular, the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. It was further concerned that imposing restrictions on foreign funding directed to NGOs might be used to apply illegitimate pressure on them and to unjustifiably interfere with their activities.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 69/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 156 Judith Sargentini

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(38) In February 2018, a legislative (38) In February 2018, a legislative package consisting of three draft laws, also package consisting of three draft laws, also known as the “Stop-Soros Package” known as the “Stop-Soros Package” (T/19776, T/19775, T/19774), was (T/19776, T/19775, T/19774), was presented by the Hungarian Government. presented by the Hungarian Government. On 14 February 2018, the President of the On 14 February 2018, the President of the Conference of INGOs of the Council of Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe and President of the Expert Council Europe and President of the Expert Council on NGO Law made a statement indicating on NGO Law made a statement indicating that the package does not comply with the that the package does not comply with the freedom of association, particularly for freedom of association, particularly for NGOs which deal with migrants. On 15 NGOs which deal with migrants. On 15 February 2018, the Council of Europe February 2018, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Commissioner for Human Rights expressed similar concerns. In its expressed similar concerns. On 8 March concluding observations of 5 April 2018, 2018, the UN Special Rapporteur on the the UN Human Rights Committee promotion and protection of the right to expressed concerns that by alluding to the freedom of opinion and expression, the “survival of the nation” and protection of Special Rapporteur on the situation of citizens and culture, and by linking the human rights defenders, the Independent work of NGOs to an alleged international Expert on human rights and international conspiracy, the legislative package would solidarity, the Special Rapporteur on the stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to human rights of migrants, and the Special carry out their important activities in Rapporteur on contemporary forms of support of human rights and, in particular, racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and and related intolerance warned that the migrants. It was further concerned that bill would lead to undue restrictions on imposing restrictions on foreign funding the freedom of association and the directed to NGOs might be used to apply freedom of expression in Hungary. In its illegitimate pressure on them and to concluding observations of 5 April 2018, unjustifiably interfere with their activities. the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that by alluding to the “survival of the nation” and protection of citizens and culture, and by linking the work of NGOs to an alleged international conspiracy, the legislative package would stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to carry out their important activities in support of human rights and, in particular,

PE622.146v02-00 70/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. It was further concerned that imposing restrictions on foreign funding directed to NGOs might be used to apply illegitimate pressure on them and to unjustifiably interfere with their activities. On 22 March 2018, the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe requested an opinion of the Venice Commission on the draft legislative package.

Or. en

Amendment 157 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 71/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

activities in support of human rights and, in particular, the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. It was further concerned that imposing restrictions on foreign funding directed to NGOs might be used to apply illegitimate pressure on them and to unjustifiably interfere with their activities.

Or. en

Amendment 158 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Kati Piri, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(38) In February 2018, a legislative (38) In February 2018, a legislative package consisting of three draft laws, also package consisting of three draft laws, also known as the “Stop-Soros Package” known as the “Stop-Soros Package” (T/19776, T/19775, T/19774), was (T/19776, T/19775, T/19774), was presented by the Hungarian Government. presented by the Hungarian Government. On 14 February 2018, the President of the On 14 February 2018, the President of the Conference of INGOs of the Council of Conference of INGOs of the Council of Europe and President of the Expert Council Europe and President of the Expert Council on NGO Law made a statement indicating on NGO Law made a statement indicating that the package does not comply with the that the package does not comply with the freedom of association, particularly for freedom of association, particularly for NGOs which deal with migrants. On 15 NGOs which deal with migrants. On 15 February 2018, the Council of Europe February 2018, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Commissioner for Human Rights expressed similar concerns. In its expressed similar concerns. On 3 March concluding observations of 5 April 2018, 2018, UN human rights experts warned the UN Human Rights Committee that the bill would lead to undue expressed concerns that by alluding to the restrictions on the freedom of association “survival of the nation” and protection of and the freedom of expression in citizens and culture, and by linking the Hungary. In its concluding observations of work of NGOs to an alleged international 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights conspiracy, the legislative package would Committee expressed concerns that by stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to alluding to the “survival of the nation” and carry out their important activities in protection of citizens and culture, and by support of human rights and, in particular, linking the work of NGOs to an alleged

PE622.146v02-00 72/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and international conspiracy, the legislative migrants. It was further concerned that package would stigmatise NGOs and curb imposing restrictions on foreign funding their ability to carry out their important directed to NGOs might be used to apply activities in support of human rights and, in illegitimate pressure on them and to particular, the rights of refugees, asylum unjustifiably interfere with their activities. seekers and migrants. It was further concerned that imposing restrictions on foreign funding directed to NGOs might be used to apply illegitimate pressure on them and to unjustifiably interfere with their activities. The Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on 22 March 2018 requested an opinion of the Venice Commission on the compatibility of the “Stop Soros” draft legislative package with international human rights standards.

Or. en

Amendment 159 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 73/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

“survival of the nation” and protection of “survival of the nation” and protection of citizens and culture, and by linking the citizens and culture, and by linking the work of NGOs to an alleged international work of NGOs to an alleged international conspiracy, the legislative package would conspiracy, the legislative package would stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to carry out their important activities in carry out their important activities in support of human rights and, in particular, support of human rights and, in particular, the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. It was further concerned that migrants. It was further concerned that imposing restrictions on foreign funding imposing restrictions on foreign funding directed to NGOs might be used to apply directed to NGOs might be used to apply illegitimate pressure on them and to illegitimate pressure on them and to unjustifiably interfere with their activities. unjustifiably interfere with their activities. One of these draft laws aims to tax any external NGO funding from outside Hungary, including EU funding, at a rate of 25% which could constitute a misappropriation of EU funds and it questions the compatibility of such a provision with European law.

Or. fr

Amendment 160 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 74/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

the UN Human Rights Committee the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that by alluding to the expressed concerns that by alluding to the “survival of the nation” and protection of “survival of the nation” and protection of citizens and culture, and by linking the citizens and culture, and by linking the work of NGOs to an alleged international work of NGOs to an alleged international conspiracy, the legislative package would conspiracy, the legislative package would stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to carry out their important activities in carry out their important activities in support of human rights and, in particular, support of human rights and, in particular, the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. It was further concerned that migrants. It was further concerned that imposing restrictions on foreign funding imposing restrictions on foreign funding directed to NGOs might be used to apply directed to NGOs might be used to apply illegitimate pressure on them and to illegitimate pressure on them and to unjustifiably interfere with their activities. unjustifiably interfere with their activities. Plurality of voices and the possibility of dissent by civil society is a necessary part of a modern European state.

Or. en

Amendment 161 Michał Boni, Carlos Coelho, Frank Engel, Jaromír Štětina

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 75/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

“survival of the nation” and protection of “survival of the nation” and protection of citizens and culture, and by linking the citizens and culture, and by linking the work of NGOs to an alleged international work of NGOs to an alleged international conspiracy, the legislative package would conspiracy, the legislative package would stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to stigmatise NGOs and curb their ability to carry out their important activities in carry out their important activities in support of human rights and, in particular, support of human rights and, in particular, the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and the rights of refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. It was further concerned that migrants. It was further concerned that imposing restrictions on foreign funding imposing restrictions on foreign funding directed to NGOs might be used to apply directed to NGOs might be used to apply illegitimate pressure on them and to illegitimate pressure on them and to unjustifiably interfere with their activities. unjustifiably interfere with their activities. The legislative package will deprive NGOs of legal remedy to appeal against arbitrary decisions.

Or. en

Amendment 162 Josef Weidenholzer, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Kati Piri, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(38a) Ensuring an enabling environment for civil society is an obligation under international human rights and EU law. The measures of the Hungarian government’s to obstruct the work of civil society organisations are contrary to the EU’s founding principles as enshrined in Article 2 TEU.

Or. en

Amendment 163 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – subheading 8 a (new)

PE622.146v02-00 76/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

Right to strike

Or. en

Justification

Worth to mention the reservations in the right to strike: https://financialobserver.eu/ce/the- hungarian-government-problems-with-trade-unions/

Amendment 164 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 38 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(38a) Since December 2010 Strikes in Hungary are illegal in principle, when the government of Victor Orban passed an amendment to the so-called Act on strikes. The changes mean that strikes will, in principle, be allowed in companies associated with governmental administration through public service contracts. The amendment does not apply to professional groups that simply do not have such a right, such as train drivers, police officers, medical personnel and air traffic controllers. The problem lies somewhere else, mainly in the percentage of employees who must take part in the strike referendum, to make it important - up to 70%. Then the decision on the legality of strikes will be taken by a labour court that is completely subordinate to the state. In 2011, nine applications for strike permits were submitted. In seven cases they were rejected without giving a reason; two of them were processed, but it proved impossible to issue a decision.

AM\1157114EN.docx 77/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Or. en

Amendment 165 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(39) On 17-27 May 2016, the UN (39) On 17-27 May 2016, the UN Working Group on discrimination against Working Group on discrimination against women in law and in practice visited women in law and in practice visited Hungary. In its report, the Working Group Hungary. In its report, the Working Group indicated that a conservative form of indicated that a conservative form of family, whose protection is guaranteed as family, whose protection is guaranteed as essential to national survival, should not be essential to national survival, should not be put in an uneven balance with women’s put in an uneven balance with women’s political, economic and social rights and political, economic and social rights and the empowerment of women. The Working the empowerment of women. The Working Group also pointed out that a woman’s Group also pointed out that a woman’s right to equality cannot be seen merely in right to equality cannot be seen merely in the light of protection of vulnerable groups the light of protection of vulnerable groups alongside children, the elderly and the alongside children, the elderly and the disabled, as they are an integral part of all disabled, as they are an integral part of all such groups. such groups. On the other hand, the Working Party acknowledged the efforts of the Hungarian Government to strengthening the reconciliation of work and family life by introducing generous provisions in family support system and in relation with early childhood education and care as well as further acknowledged the cooperation of the Hungarian Government with the international human rights mechanism and its engagement in frank and open dialogue.

Or. en

Amendment 166 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 39

PE622.146v02-00 78/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(39) On 17-27 May 2016, the UN (39) On 17-27 May 2016, the UN Working Group on discrimination against Working Group on discrimination against women in law and in practice visited women in law and in practice visited Hungary. In its report, the Working Group Hungary. In its report, the Working Group indicated that a conservative form of indicated that a conservative form of family, whose protection is guaranteed as family, whose protection is guaranteed as essential to national survival, should not be essential to national survival, should not be put in an uneven balance with women’s put in an uneven balance with women’s political, economic and social rights and political, economic and social rights and the empowerment of women. The Working the empowerment of women. The Working Group also pointed out that a woman’s Group also pointed out that a woman’s right to equality cannot be seen merely in right to equality cannot be seen merely in the light of protection of vulnerable groups the light of protection of vulnerable groups alongside children, the elderly and the alongside children, the elderly and the disabled, as they are an integral part of all disabled, as they are an integral part of all such groups. such groups. The OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights for the 2018 Hungarian Parliamentary elections expressed on 9 April 2018 similar concerns as the UN Working Group, and especially noted a concerning underrepresentation of women in the political life, and also the absence of any instruments to promote the positive inclusion of females in this field.

Or. en

Amendment 167 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 79/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

political, economic and social rights and political, economic and social rights and the empowerment of women. The Working the empowerment of women. The artificial Group also pointed out that a woman’s confrontation of families and women’s right to equality cannot be seen merely in rights is however extremely harmful, the light of protection of vulnerable since establishing a family-friendly groups alongside children, the elderly and environment is necessary for the the disabled, as they are an integral part empowerment of women and their of all such groups. freedom of choice. Moreover, competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States. This issue clearly falls under the national competence of Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 168 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 39

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(39) On 17-27 May 2016, the UN (39) On 17-27 May 2016, the UN Working Group on discrimination against Working Group on discrimination against women in law and in practice visited women in law and in practice visited Hungary. In its report, the Working Group Hungary. In its report, the Working Group indicated that a conservative form of indicated that a conservative form of family, whose protection is guaranteed as family, whose protection is guaranteed as essential to national survival, should not be essential to national survival, should not be put in an uneven balance with women’s put in an uneven balance with women’s political, economic and social rights and political, economic and social rights and the empowerment of women. The Working the empowerment of women. The Working Group also pointed out that a woman’s Group also pointed out that a woman’s right to equality cannot be seen merely in right to equality cannot be seen merely in the light of protection of vulnerable groups the light of protection of vulnerable groups alongside children, the elderly and the alongside children, the elderly and the disabled, as they are an integral part of all disabled, as they are an integral part of all such groups. such groups. Additionally, there is a clear verbal discrimination against women in the school publishing.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 80/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Justification

Adding a reference to discrimination in school textbooks: http://politicalcritique.org/cee/hungary/2017/sexism-and-racism-the-new-hungarian- schoolbooks-teach-everything-you-dont-want-your-child-to-learn/

Amendment 169 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 40

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(40) In its concluding observations of 5 (40) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed regret that Committee expressed regret that patriarchal stereotyped attitudes still patriarchal stereotyped attitudes still prevail in Hungary with respect to the prevail in Hungary with respect to the position of women in society, and noted position of women in society, and noted with concern discriminatory comments with concern discriminatory comments made by political figures against women. It made by political figures against women. It also noted that the Hungarian Criminal also noted that the Hungarian Criminal Code does not fully protect female victims Code does not fully protect female victims of domestic violence. of domestic violence. By contrast, Hungarian law provides a strong protection for women against violence; the legal definition of ‘violence committed in a relationship’ in the Criminal Code of Hungary covers a broader range of actions to be considered as abuse and since 2013 punishes these actions more severely than before and as of 1st January 2008 harassment constitutes a sui generis criminal act. Moreover, competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States. This issue clearly falls under the national competence of Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 170 Monika Beňová

AM\1157114EN.docx 81/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 40

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(40) In its concluding observations of 5 (40) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed regret that Committee expressed regret that patriarchal stereotyped attitudes still patriarchal stereotyped attitudes still prevail in Hungary with respect to the prevail in Hungary with respect to the position of women in society, and noted position of women in society, and noted with concern discriminatory comments with concern discriminatory comments made by political figures against women. It made by political figures against women. also noted that the Hungarian Criminal These observations are furthermore Code does not fully protect female victims underlined by the fact that Hungary is of domestic violence. ranked as one of the worst performing countries in the Union when it comes to the representation of females in the national Parliament, with a consistent percentage of around 10% of seats held by women. It also noted that the Hungarian Criminal Code does not fully protect female victims of domestic violence.

Or. en

Amendment 171 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 40

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 82/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

signed the Istanbul Convention and that the European Union has acceded to it.

Or. en

Justification

The above appeal stems from the fact that, since Hungary has already signed the Convention and are bound by the Council decision of 11 May 2017 on EU accession to the Convention, they have the obligation to comply with it - and thus have the duty to extend the protection of women affected by violence in family.

Amendment 172 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 41

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(41) On 27 April 2017, the Commission (41) On 27 April 2017, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion calling on issued a reasoned opinion calling on Hungary to correctly implement Directive Hungary to correctly implement Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council3, given that Hungarian and of the Council, given that Hungarian law provides an exception to the law provides an exception to the prohibition of discrimination on the prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of sex that is much broader than grounds of sex that is much broader than the exception provided by that Directive. the exception provided by that Directive. On the same date, the Commission issued a On the same date, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion to Hungary for non- reasoned opinion to Hungary for non- compliance with Directive 92/85/EEC of compliance with Directive 92/85/EEC of the Council4 that stated that employers the Council that stated that employers have have a duty to adapt working conditions for a duty to adapt working conditions for pregnant or breastfeeding workers to avoid pregnant or breastfeeding workers to avoid a risk to their health or safety. a risk to their health or safety; however, the closure of the case is soon to be expected, since the amendments introduced by the Hungarian Government resolved all the disputed issues in question. The Fundamental Law of Hungary sets forth mandatory provisions for the protection of parents’ workplaces and for upholding the principle of equal treatment; consequently, there are special

AM\1157114EN.docx 83/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

labour law rules for women and for mothers and fathers raising children. ______3 Directive 2006/54/EC of the European 3 Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (OJ L 204, employment and occupation (OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 23). 26.7.2006, p. 23). 4 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 4 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth individual Directive within the meaning of individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16 (1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) Article 16 (1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1). (OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1).

Or. en

Amendment 173 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 41

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(41) On 27 April 2017, the Commission (41) On 27 April 2017, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion calling on issued a reasoned opinion calling on Hungary to correctly implement Directive Hungary to correctly implement Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council3, given that Hungarian and of the Council3, given that Hungarian law provides an exception to the law provides an exception to the prohibition of discrimination on the prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of sex that is much broader than grounds of sex that is much broader than the exception provided by that Directive. the exception provided by that Directive. On the same date, the Commission issued a On the same date, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion to Hungary for non- reasoned opinion to Hungary for non- compliance with Directive 92/85/EEC of compliance with Directive 92/85/EEC of the Council4 that stated that employers the Council4 that stated that employers have a duty to adapt working conditions for have a duty to adapt working conditions for pregnant or breastfeeding workers to avoid pregnant or breastfeeding workers to avoid a risk to their health or safety. therefore

PE622.146v02-00 84/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

a risk to their health or safety. the Hungarian Government has committed itself to amend the necessary provisions of the Act CXXV of 2003 on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities, as well as the Act I of 2012 on the Labour Code. ______3 Directive 2006/54/EC of the European 3 Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (OJ L 204, employment and occupation (OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 23). 26.7.2006, p. 23). 4 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 4 Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth individual Directive within the meaning of individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16 (1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) Article 16 (1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) (OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1). (OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1).

Or. en

Amendment 174 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 42

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(42) In its concluding observations of 5 (42) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that the Committee expressed concerns that the constitutional ban on discrimination does constitutional ban on discrimination does not explicitly list sexual orientation and not explicitly list sexual orientation and gender identity among the grounds of gender identity among the grounds of discrimination and that its restrictive discrimination and that its restrictive definition of family could give rise to definition of family could give rise to discrimination as it does not encompass discrimination as it does not encompass certain types of family arrangements, certain types of family arrangements, including same-sex couples. The including same-sex couples. The Committee was also concerned about acts Committee was also concerned about acts

AM\1157114EN.docx 85/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

of violence and the prevalence of negative of violence and the prevalence of negative stereotypes and prejudice against lesbian, stereotypes and prejudice against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, particularly in the employment and particularly in the employment and education sectors. It also mentioned forced education sectors. placement in medical institutions, isolation and forced treatment of large numbers of persons with mental, intellectual and psychosocial disabilities, as well as reported violence and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and allegations of a high number of non- investigated deaths in closed institutions.

Or. en

Justification

Point 42 deals with the constitutional prohibition of discrimination, which does not explicitly mention sexual orientation and gender identity between the grounds of discrimination. In turn, the last sentence deals with a different situation that does not affect only people from the LGBTQ environment. Points should be separated.

Amendment 175 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 42

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(42) In its concluding observations of 5 (42) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that the Committee expressed concerns that the constitutional ban on discrimination does constitutional ban on discrimination does not explicitly list sexual orientation and not explicitly list sexual orientation and gender identity among the grounds of gender identity among the grounds of discrimination and that its restrictive discrimination and that its restrictive definition of family could give rise to definition of family could give rise to discrimination as it does not encompass discrimination as it does not encompass certain types of family arrangements, certain types of family arrangements, including same-sex couples. The including same-sex couples. Against all of Committee was also concerned about acts these, sexual orientation and gender of violence and the prevalence of negative identity fall under strict constitutional stereotypes and prejudice against lesbian, protection in Hungary, since the

PE622.146v02-00 86/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

gay, bisexual and transgender persons, Fundamental Law contains an open list, particularly in the employment and which forbids discrimination based on education sectors. It also mentioned forced ‘any other circumstances’ and the placement in medical institutions, Hungarian Act on Equal Treatment isolation and forced treatment of large explicitly forbids discrimination based on numbers of persons with mental, both grounds ever since 2004. The intellectual and psychosocial disabilities, Committee was also concerned about acts as well as reported violence and cruel, of violence and the prevalence of negative inhuman and degrading treatment and stereotypes and prejudice against lesbian, allegations of a high number of non- gay, bisexual and transgender persons, investigated deaths in closed institutions. particularly in the employment and education sectors. The Hungarian Penal Code strictly punishes inciting violence or hatred against any member of a societal group and explicitly on the grounds of disability, gender identity or sexual orientation; this felony is threatened with an imprisonment up to three years.

Or. en

Amendment 176 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 42 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(42a) Also in the same concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about forced placement in medical institutions, isolation and forced treatment of large numbers of persons with mental, intellectual and psychosocial disabilities, as well as reported violence and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and allegations of a high number of non-investigated deaths in closed institutions.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 87/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 177 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(43) In his report following his visit to deleted Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated that he was concerned about the deterioration of the situation as regards racism and intolerance in Hungary, with anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form of intolerance, as illustrated by distinctively harsh, including violence targeting Roma people and paramilitary marches and patrolling in Roma- populated villages. He also pointed out that, despite positions taken by the Hungarian authorities to condemn anti- Semitic speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring problem, manifesting itself through hate speech and instances of violence against Jewish persons or property. In addition, he mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia targeting migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees, and of intolerance affecting other social groups such as LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless persons. The European Commission against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned similar concerns in its report on Hungary published on 9 June 2015.

Or. en

Amendment 178 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 43

PE622.146v02-00 88/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(43) In his report following his visit to (43) In his report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated Commissioner for Human Rights indicated that he was concerned about the that he was concerned about the deterioration of the situation as regards deterioration of the situation as regards racism and intolerance in Hungary, with racism and intolerance in Hungary, with anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form of intolerance, as illustrated by of intolerance, as illustrated by distinctively harsh, including violence distinctively harsh, including violence targeting Roma people and paramilitary targeting Roma people and paramilitary marches and patrolling in Roma-populated marches and patrolling in Roma-populated villages. He also pointed out that, despite villages. However, it was exactly the positions taken by the Hungarian current Hungarian Government that authorities to condemn anti-Semitic initiated the amendment of the Penal speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring Code in 2011 in order to prevent problem, manifesting itself through hate campaigns of extreme right paramilitary speech and instances of violence against groups, by introducing the so called Jewish persons or property. In addition, he ‘crime in uniform’, threatening any mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia provocative unsocial behaviour inducing targeting migrants, including asylum fear in a member of a national, ethnic or seekers and refugees, and of intolerance religious community with three years of affecting other social groups such as imprisonment. He also pointed out that, LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless despite positions taken by the Hungarian persons. The European Commission authorities to condemn anti-Semitic against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring similar concerns in its report on Hungary problem, manifesting itself through hate published on 9 June 2015. speech and instances of violence against Jewish persons or property. In addition, he mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia targeting migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees, and of intolerance affecting other social groups such as LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless persons. The European Commission against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned similar concerns in its report on Hungary published on 9 June 2015. While racism, xenophobia and intolerance are not any more prevalent in Hungary than in any other Member State, the Hungarian Act on Equal Opportunities provides an even stronger protection than the Directive implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, since it extends its

AM\1157114EN.docx 89/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

rules to cover all grounds of discrimination. According to the Action and Protection Foundation’s report (January-June 2017) the number of anti- Semitic actions in Hungary decreased compared to the number of the previous years. During the first half of 2017 the Foundation identified 18 anti-Semitic hate crimes, while in 2016 there were 23, in 2015’s first half there were 26 hate crimes action. It is also worth examining domestic data in an international comparison. Hungarian laws and legal norms identify the following five offenses related to hatred or incitement of hatred including anti-Semitic or Holocaust denying, denigrating acts: (1) violating the dignity of a member of a national, religious etc. community, as well as the dignity of a community itself (being also an aggravating circumstance if it serves a motive for another crime), (2) the denial or belittling in public of crimes committed by totalitarian (Nazi and Communist) regimes, punishable with up to 3 years of imprisonment (3) the use of totalitarian symbols in public, (4) establishing and running paramilitary groups or institutions, and (5) hate speech by MPs in the Parliament additionally sanctioned by the House Rules. Moreover, the rules of the Criminal Code have been tightened regarding “uniformed crime”. It was largely due to the Hungarian Government’s firm stance against anti- Semitism that by the unanimous decision of 31 countries, Hungary was awarded the chairmanship of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2015-2016 with a high international recognition of Jewish and non-Jewish organisations and personalities. As a result of the Hungarian Chairmanship’s year-long endeavours and lobbying in EU institutions, EU and IHRA member states, the EU’s new data protection draft legislation (GDPR) was amended in line

PE622.146v02-00 90/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

with IHRA commitments.

Or. en

Amendment 179 Heinz K. Becker, Cecilia Wikström, Michał Boni, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(43) In his report following his visit to (43) In his report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated Commissioner for Human Rights indicated that he was concerned about the that he was concerned about the deterioration of the situation as regards deterioration of the situation as regards racism and intolerance in Hungary, with racism and intolerance in Hungary, with anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form of intolerance, as illustrated by of intolerance, as illustrated by distinctively harsh, including violence distinctively harsh, including violence targeting Roma people and paramilitary targeting Roma people and paramilitary marches and patrolling in Roma-populated marches and patrolling in Roma-populated villages. He also pointed out that, despite villages. He also pointed out that, despite positions taken by the Hungarian positions taken by the Hungarian authorities to condemn anti-Semitic authorities to condemn anti-Semitic speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring problem, manifesting itself through hate problem, manifesting itself through hate speech and instances of violence against speech and instances of violence against Jewish persons or property. In addition, he Jewish persons or property. In addition, in mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia a speech held on 15. March 2018 in targeting migrants, including asylum Budapest, the Prime Minister of Hungary, seekers and refugees, and of intolerance Victor Orban, used polemic attacks affecting other social groups such as including clearly anti-Semitic stereotypes LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless against George Soros, that according to persons. The European Commission the European Parliament`s Anti-Semitism against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned Resolution, which appeals the importance similar concerns in its report on Hungary of the IHRA working definition on Anti- published on 9 June 2015. Semitism, that serves as a model for all EU citizens, would have been assessed as punishable. In addition, he mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia targeting migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees, and of intolerance affecting other social groups such as LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless persons. The European

AM\1157114EN.docx 91/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Commission against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned similar concerns in its report on Hungary published on 9 June 2015.

Or. en

Amendment 180 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(43) In his report following his visit to (43) In his report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated Commissioner for Human Rights indicated that he was concerned about the that he was concerned about the deterioration of the situation as regards deterioration of the situation as regards racism and intolerance in Hungary, with racism and intolerance in Hungary, with anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form of intolerance, as illustrated by of intolerance, as illustrated by distinctively harsh, including violence distinctively harsh, including violence targeting Roma people and paramilitary targeting Roma people and paramilitary marches and patrolling in Roma-populated marches and patrolling in Roma-populated villages. He also pointed out that, despite villages. He also pointed out that, despite positions taken by the Hungarian positions taken by the Hungarian authorities to condemn anti-Semitic authorities to condemn anti-Semitic speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring problem, manifesting itself through hate problem, manifesting itself through hate speech and instances of violence against speech and instances of violence against Jewish persons or property. In addition, he Jewish persons or property. In addition, he mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia targeting migrants, including asylum targeting migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees, and of intolerance seekers and refugees, and of intolerance affecting other social groups such as affecting other social groups such as LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless persons. The European Commission persons. The European Commission against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned similar concerns in its report on Hungary similar concerns in its report on Hungary published on 9 June 2015. published on 9 June 2015. Notes the answer to those accusations made by the Hungarian Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister during the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee

PE622.146v02-00 92/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

meeting, held on 26 April 2018, however does not put faith in those explanations. According to Fundamental Rights Agency annual report, 2017 the situation of Roma people in Hungary worsen since 2016.

Or. en

Amendment 181 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 43

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(43) In his report following his visit to (43) In his report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated Commissioner for Human Rights indicated that he was concerned about the that he was concerned about the deterioration of the situation as regards deterioration of the situation as regards racism and intolerance in Hungary, with racism and intolerance in Hungary, with anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form anti-Gypsyism being the most blatant form of intolerance, as illustrated by of intolerance, as illustrated by distinctively harsh, including violence distinctively harsh, including violence targeting Roma people and paramilitary targeting Roma people and paramilitary marches and patrolling in Roma-populated marches and patrolling in Roma-populated villages. He also pointed out that, despite villages. He also pointed out that, despite positions taken by the Hungarian positions taken by the Hungarian authorities to condemn anti-Semitic authorities to condemn anti-Semitic speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring speech, anti-Semitism is a recurring problem, manifesting itself through hate problem, manifesting itself through hate speech and instances of violence against speech and instances of violence against Jewish persons or property. In addition, he Jewish persons or property. In addition, he mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia mentioned a recrudescence of xenophobia targeting migrants, including asylum targeting migrants, including asylum seekers and refugees, and of intolerance seekers and refugees, and of intolerance affecting other social groups such as affecting other social groups such as LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless LGBTI persons, the poor and homeless persons. The European Commission persons. The European Commission against Racism and Xenophobia mentioned against Racism and xenophobia mentioned similar concerns in its report on Hungary similar concerns in its report on Hungary published on 9 June 2015. published on 9 June 2015. Protection of all minority rights has the utmost priority, and no discrimination of any particular group can be accepted by the Hungarian

AM\1157114EN.docx 93/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Government.

Or. en

Amendment 182 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(44) In its Fourth Opinion on Hungary deleted adopted on 25 February 2016, the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities noted that Roma continue to suffer systemic discrimination and inequality in all fields of life, including housing, employment, education, access to health and participation in social and political life. In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended the Hungarian authorities to make sustained and effective efforts to prevent, combat and sanction the inequality and discrimination suffered by Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma representatives, the living conditions, access to health services and employment of Roma, take effective measures to end practices that lead to the continued segregation of Roma children at school and redouble efforts to remedy shortcomings faced by Roma children in the field of education, ensure that Roma children have equal opportunities for access to all levels of quality education, and continue to take measures to prevent children from being wrongfully placed in special schools and classes.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 94/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 183 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(44) In its Fourth Opinion on Hungary (44) In its Fourth Opinion on Hungary adopted on 25 February 2016, the Advisory adopted on 25 February 2016, the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities for the Protection of National Minorities noted that Roma continue to suffer noted that Roma continue to suffer systemic discrimination and inequality in systemic discrimination and inequality in all fields of life, including housing, all fields of life, including housing, employment, education, access to health employment, education, access to health and participation in social and political life. and participation in social and political life. In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended the Hungarian Europe recommended the Hungarian authorities to make sustained and effective authorities to make sustained and effective efforts to prevent, combat and sanction the efforts to prevent, combat and sanction the inequality and discrimination suffered by inequality and discrimination suffered by Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma representatives, the living Roma representatives, the living conditions, access to health services and conditions, access to health services and employment of Roma, take effective employment of Roma, take effective measures to end practices that lead to the measures to end practices that lead to the continued segregation of Roma children at continued segregation of Roma children at school and redouble efforts to remedy school and redouble efforts to remedy shortcomings faced by Roma children in shortcomings faced by Roma children in the field of education, ensure that Roma the field of education, ensure that Roma children have equal opportunities for children have equal opportunities for access to all levels of quality education, access to all levels of quality education, and continue to take measures to prevent and continue to take measures to prevent children from being wrongfully placed in children from being wrongfully placed in special schools and classes. special schools and classes. In its Report of the Field Assessment Visit to Hungary, 29 June – 1 July 2015, ODIHR stated that the worst situation of Roma people occurred in the town called Miskolc. The local authorities adopted a model of anti- Roma measures, even before the change of the local decree of 2014, and that public figures in the city often made anti- Roma statements. For example, it was reported that in February 2013, Ákos Kriza - Mayor of Miskolc - said he wanted to clean the city of “anti-social, perverted

AM\1157114EN.docx 95/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Roma” who allegedly illegally benefited from the Nest program (Fészekrakó program) for housing benefits and people living in social flats with rent and maintenance fees. His words meant the beginning of a series of evictions, and during this month, fifty apartments were removed from 273 apartments in the appropriate category - also to clean up the land for are novation of a stadium.

Or. en

Justification

The rapporteur forgot to mention the most famous case of forced evictions of the Roma population in Hungary. The more so that everything is described in a separate ODIHR report. Source: https://www.osce.org/odihr/262026?download=true

Amendment 184 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 96/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

inequality and discrimination suffered by inequality and discrimination suffered by Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma representatives, the living Roma representatives, the living conditions, access to health services and conditions, access to health services and employment of Roma, take effective employment of Roma, take effective measures to end practices that lead to the measures to end practices that lead to the continued segregation of Roma children at continued segregation of Roma children at school and redouble efforts to remedy school and redouble efforts to remedy shortcomings faced by Roma children in shortcomings faced by Roma children in the field of education, ensure that Roma the field of education, ensure that Roma children have equal opportunities for children have equal opportunities for access to all levels of quality education, access to all levels of quality education, and continue to take measures to prevent and continue to take measures to prevent children from being wrongfully placed in children from being wrongfully placed in special schools and classes. special schools and classes. In this spirit, the Hungarian Government has taken several substantial measures to foster the inclusion of Roma ever since it took office in 2010; among others adopted the Job Protection Action Plan on 4th July 2012 to protect the employment of disadvantaged employees and foster the employment of the long-term unemployed; adopted the “Healthy Hungary 2014–2020” Healthcare Sectoral Strategy to reduce health inequalities; in 2014 adopted a strategy for the period of 2014 to 2020 for the treatment of slum-like housing in segregated settlements.

Or. en

Amendment 185 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 44

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 97/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

employment, education, access to health employment, education, access to health and participation in social and political life. and participation in social and political life. In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended the Hungarian Europe recommended the Hungarian authorities to make sustained and effective authorities to make sustained and effective efforts to prevent, combat and sanction the efforts to prevent, combat and sanction the inequality and discrimination suffered by inequality and discrimination suffered by Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma, improve, in close consultation with Roma representatives, the living Roma representatives, the living conditions, access to health services and conditions, access to health services and employment of Roma, take effective employment of Roma, take effective measures to end practices that lead to the measures to end practices that lead to the continued segregation of Roma children at continued segregation of Roma children at school and redouble efforts to remedy school and redouble efforts to remedy shortcomings faced by Roma children in shortcomings faced by Roma children in the field of education, ensure that Roma the field of education, ensure that Roma children have equal opportunities for children have equal opportunities for access to all levels of quality education, access to all levels of quality education, and continue to take measures to prevent and continue to take measures to prevent children from being wrongfully placed in children from being wrongfully placed in special schools and classes. special schools and classes. It must be stressed that the inclusion of Roma children at an early age is vital for the overall long-term successful integration of the Roma community in Hungary.

Or. en

Amendment 186 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 44 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(44a) The Hungarian Government is deeply committed to achieve the integration of Roma people; the issue was put to the political agenda of the European Union as the initiative of the Hungarian presidency in the first half of 2011, by initiating the EU Framework Strategy on Roma inclusion, which was not only based on a human rights approach but also from the aspects of

PE622.146v02-00 98/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

poverty and social inclusion, recognising that a complex approach is necessary for genuine solutions. Furthermore, the Hungarian Government in 2014 updated the Hungarian National Social Inclusion Strategy, and established a three-year action plan for its implementation by designating responsible persons, deadlines and available funds.

Or. en

Amendment 187 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 45

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(45) In its judgement of 29 January deleted 2013, Horváth and Kiss v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that the relevant Hungarian legislation as applied in practice lacked adequate safeguards and resulted in the over-representation and segregation of Roma children in special schools due to the systematic misdiagnosis of mental disability, which amounted to a violation of the right to education free from discrimination. The execution of that judgment is still pending.

Or. en

Amendment 188 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 45

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(45) In its judgement of 29 January (45) In its judgement of 29 January 2013, Horváth and Kiss v. Hungary, the 2013, Horváth and Kiss v. Hungary, the

AM\1157114EN.docx 99/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

ECtHR found that the relevant Hungarian ECtHR found that the relevant Hungarian legislation as applied in practice lacked legislation as applied in practice lacked adequate safeguards and resulted in the adequate safeguards and resulted in the over-representation and segregation of over-representation and segregation of Roma children in special schools due to the Roma children in special schools due to the systematic misdiagnosis of mental systematic misdiagnosis of mental disability, which amounted to a violation of disability, which amounted to a violation of the right to education free from the right to education free from discrimination. The execution of that discrimination. Continuous consultations judgment is still pending. are in place for resolving practical issues in this regard, the Hungarian Government has taken several steps to solve these questions, also including fulfilling the decision of the ECtHR.

Or. en

Amendment 189 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 45

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(45) In its judgement of 29 January (45) In its judgement of 29 January 2013, Horváth and Kiss v. Hungary, the 2013, Horváth and Kiss v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that the relevant Hungarian ECtHR found that the relevant Hungarian legislation as applied in practice lacked legislation as applied in practice lacked adequate safeguards and resulted in the adequate safeguards and resulted in the over-representation and segregation of over-representation and segregation of Roma children in special schools due to the Roma children in special schools due to the systematic misdiagnosis of mental systematic misdiagnosis of mental disability, which amounted to a violation of disability, which amounted to a violation of the right to education free from the right to education free from discrimination. The execution of that discrimination. Despite the complexity of judgment is still pending. the issue in which one cannot expect quick and tangible results from day to day, the improving tendency in Hungary is evident.

Or. en

Amendment 190 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

PE622.146v02-00 100/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(46) On 26 May 2016, the Commission deleted sent a letter of formal notice to the Hungarian authorities in relation to both Hungarian legislation and administrative practices which result in Roma children being disproportionately over-represented in special schools for mentally disabled children and subject to a considerable degree of segregated education in mainstream schools.

Or. en

Amendment 191 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(46) On 26 May 2016, the Commission (46) On 26 May 2016, the Commission sent a letter of formal notice to the sent a letter of formal notice to the Hungarian authorities in relation to both Hungarian authorities in relation to both Hungarian legislation and administrative Hungarian legislation and administrative practices which result in Roma children practices which result in Roma children being disproportionately over-represented being disproportionately over-represented in special schools for mentally disabled in special schools for mentally disabled children and subject to a considerable children and subject to a considerable degree of segregated education in degree of segregated education in mainstream schools. mainstream schools. From the very beginning of the infringement procedure, the Hungarian Government actively conducted dialogues with the Commission, as a result of which the Hungarian Government amended the concerned legislation and took actions in order to ensure compliance with the legal obligations; Commissioner Věra Jourová has also confirmed that the amendments were adequate to remedy the

AM\1157114EN.docx 101/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Commission’s concerns.

Or. en

Amendment 192 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 46

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(46) On 26 May 2016, the Commission (46) On 26 May 2016, the Commission sent a letter of formal notice to the sent a letter of formal notice to the Hungarian authorities in relation to both Hungarian authorities in relation to both Hungarian legislation and administrative Hungarian legislation and administrative practices which result in Roma children practices which result in Roma children being disproportionately over-represented being disproportionately over-represented in special schools for mentally disabled in special schools for mentally disabled children and subject to a considerable children and subject to a considerable degree of segregated education in degree of segregated education in mainstream schools. mainstream schools. The Hungarian authorities should prevent any such practices, as inclusive education has shown itself to be one of the best instruments to address segregation.

Or. en

Amendment 193 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(47) In its judgement of 20 October deleted 2015, Balázs v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that there had been a violation of the prohibition of discrimination in the context of a failure to consider the alleged anti-Roma motive of an attack. In its judgment of 12 April 2016, R.B. v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that that there

PE622.146v02-00 102/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

had been a violation of the right to private life on account of inadequate investigations into the allegations of racially motived abuse. The execution of both judgments is still pending.

Or. en

Amendment 194 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(47) In its judgement of 20 October (47) In its judgement of 20 October 2015, Balázs v. Hungary, the ECtHR held 2015, Balázs v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that there had been a violation of the that there had been a violation of the prohibition of discrimination in the context prohibition of discrimination in the context of a failure to consider the alleged anti- of a failure to consider the alleged anti- Roma motive of an attack. In its judgment Roma motive of an attack. In its judgment of 12 April 2016, R.B. v. Hungary, the of 12 April 2016, R.B. v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that that there had been a ECtHR held that that there had been a violation of the right to private life on violation of the right to private life on account of inadequate investigations into account of inadequate investigations into the allegations of racially motived abuse. the allegations of racially motived abuse. The execution of both judgments is still The execution of both judgments is still pending. pending, since the proposal for a law pronouncing the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Kampala amendments concerning Article 8 of said Statute is still in the process of being adopted by the Hungarian Parliament. Nevertheless, the Commission was notified about the proposed modifications in the legislation as well as the amendment of the Penal Code and the Director General of the Commission’s Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers notified Hungary that said modifications will align national legislation with the provisions of Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 103/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 195 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 47

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(47) In its judgement of 20 October (47) In its judgement of 20 October 2015, Balázs v. Hungary, the ECtHR held 2015, Balázs v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that there had been a violation of the that there had been a violation of the prohibition of discrimination in the context prohibition of discrimination in the context of a failure to consider the alleged anti- of a failure to consider the alleged anti- Roma motive of an attack. In its judgment Roma motive of an attack. In its judgment of 12 April 2016, R.B. v. Hungary, the of 12 April 2016, R.B. v. Hungary, the ECtHR held that that there had been a ECtHR held that that there had been a violation of the right to private life on violation of the right to private life on account of inadequate investigations into account of inadequate investigations into the allegations of racially motived abuse. the allegations of racially motived abuse. The execution of both judgments is still In these cases however, the judgements pending. had been formulated before the amendment of the Hungarian Penal Code with the purpose of implementing the Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA; the modification of the fact pattern of the crime of ‘inciting violence or hatred against the community’ entered into force on 28th October 2016.

Or. en

Amendment 196 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 48

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(48) On 29 June - 1 July 2015, the deleted OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights conducted a field assessment visit to Hungary, following reports about the actions taken by the local government of the city of Miskolc

PE622.146v02-00 104/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

concerning forced evictions of Roma. On 26 January 2016 the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights sent a letter to the Hungarian authorities expressing concerns about the treatment of Roma in Miskolc.

Or. en

Amendment 197 Kinga Gál, Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 48

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(48) On 29 June - 1 July 2015, the (48) On 29 June - 1 July 2015, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights conducted a field and Human Rights conducted a field assessment visit to Hungary, following assessment visit to Hungary, following reports about the actions taken by the local reports about the actions taken by the local government of the city of Miskolc government of the city of Miskolc concerning forced evictions of Roma. On concerning forced evictions of Roma. On 26 January 2016 the Council of Europe 26 January 2016 the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights sent a Commissioner for Human Rights sent a letter to the Hungarian authorities letters to the governments of Albania, expressing concerns about the treatment of Bulgaria, France, Hungary, Italy, Serbia Roma in Miskolc. and Sweden expressing concerns about the treatment of Roma. Based on the appeal of the government office in charge, the Supreme Court annulled the relevant articles in its decision of 28 April 282015 and the Equal Treatment Authority of Hungary also carried out an investigation and rendered a decision in July 2015, calling on the local government to cease all evictions and to develop an action plan on how to offer housing in accordance with human dignity. The action plan was adopted on 21April 2016 and in the meantime a social housing agency was also established and adequate housing was provided for Roma families. In its decision of 14 October 2016, the Equal Treatment Authority found that the

AM\1157114EN.docx 105/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

municipality fulfilled its obligations.

Or. en

Amendment 198 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 48

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(48) On 29 June - 1 July 2015, the (48) On 29 June - 1 July 2015, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights conducted a field and Human Rights conducted a field assessment visit to Hungary, following assessment visit to Hungary, following reports about the actions taken by the local reports about the actions taken by the local government of the city of Miskolc government of the city of Miskolc concerning forced evictions of Roma. On concerning forced evictions of Roma. On 26 January 2016 the Council of Europe 26 January 2016 the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights sent a Commissioner for Human Rights sent a letter to the Hungarian authorities letter to the Hungarian authorities expressing concerns about the treatment of expressing concerns about the treatment of Roma in Miskolc. Roma in Miskolc. The Commissioner for Fundamental Rights and the Deputy- Commissioner for the Rights of National Minorities issued a joint opinion on 5 June 2015 about the fundamental rights violations against the Roma in Miskolc, the recommendations of which the local government failed to adopt.

Or. en

Amendment 199 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(49) In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, deleted

PE622.146v02-00 106/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended that the Hungarian authorities continue to improve the dialogue with the Jewish community, making it sustainable, and to give combatting anti-Semitism in public spaces the highest priority, to make sustained efforts to prevent, identify, investigate, prosecute and sanction effectively all racially and ethnically motivated or anti-Semitic acts, including acts of vandalism and hate speech, and to consider amending the law so as to ensure the widest possible legal protection against racist crime.

Or. en

Amendment 200 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(49) In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, deleted the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended that the Hungarian authorities continue to improve the dialogue with the Jewish community, making it sustainable, and to give combatting anti-Semitism in public spaces the highest priority, to make sustained efforts to prevent, identify, investigate, prosecute and sanction effectively all racially and ethnically motivated or anti-Semitic acts, including acts of vandalism and hate speech, and to consider amending the law so as to ensure the widest possible legal protection against racist crime.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 107/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 201 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 49

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(49) In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the (49) In its Resolution of 5 July 2017, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recommended that the Hungarian Europe recommended that the Hungarian authorities continue to improve the authorities continue to improve the dialogue with the Jewish community, dialogue with the Jewish community, making it sustainable, and to give making it sustainable, and to give combatting anti-Semitism in public spaces combatting anti-Semitism in public spaces the highest priority, to make sustained the highest priority, to make sustained efforts to prevent, identify, investigate, efforts to prevent, identify, investigate, prosecute and sanction effectively all prosecute and sanction effectively all racially and ethnically motivated or anti- racially and ethnically motivated or anti- Semitic acts, including acts of vandalism Semitic acts, including acts of vandalism and hate speech, and to consider amending and hate speech, and to consider amending the law so as to ensure the widest possible the law so as to ensure the widest possible legal protection against racist crime. legal protection against racist crime of any kind.

Or. en

Amendment 202 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 49 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(49a) The Hungarian Government has several times declared a ‘zero tolerance policy’ against anti-Semitism and– as acknowledged by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – Hungarian Jewish life is experiencing a renaissance and Hungarian Jews live in peace and safety. The current Hungarian Government has among others, established the Holocaust Documentation Centre and Memorial Collection in 2002, ordered that the life annuity of Holocaust

PE622.146v02-00 108/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

survivors shall be raised by 50% in 2012, established the Hungarian Holocaust – 2014 Memorial Committee in 2013, declared the year of 2014 as Holocaust Memorial Year, launched renovation and restoration programmes of several Hungarian synagogues and Jewish cemeteries and is currently preparing for the 2019 European Maccabi Games to be held in Budapest. In recognition of the Hungarian Government’s firm stance against anti-Semitism, Hungary was awarded the chairmanship of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) in 2015-2016 by the unanimous decision of 31 countries.

Or. en

Amendment 203 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 49 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(49a) In its judgment of 17 January 2017, Király and Dömötör v. Hungary, and in its judgment of 12 April 2016, R.B. v. Hungary, the European Court of Human Rights found that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning two Roma persons who were victims of abuse, threats and racist insults during a demonstration against the Roma.

Or. fr

Amendment 204 Heinz K. Becker, Cecilia Wikström, Michał Boni, Juan Fernando López Aguilar

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 49 a (new)

AM\1157114EN.docx 109/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(49a) Hungary, like other EU Member States, should legally enshrine IHRA`s working definition of Anti-Semitism as the basis for criminal, media and educational measures.

Or. en

Amendment 205 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(50) In its concluding observations of 5 deleted April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about reports that the Roma community continues to suffer from widespread discrimination and exclusion, unemployment, housing and educational segregation. It is particularly concerned that, notwithstanding the Public Education Act, segregation in schools, especially church and private schools, remains prevalent and the number of Roma children placed in schools for children with mild disabilities remains disproportionately high. It also mentioned concerns about the prevalence of hate crimes and about hate speech in political discourse, the media and on the internet targeting minorities, in particular Roma, Muslims, migrants and refugees, including in the context of government- sponsored campaigns. The Committee expressed its concern over the prevalence of anti-Semitic stereotypes. The Committee also noted with concern allegations that the number of registered hate crimes is extremely low because the police often fail to investigate and

PE622.146v02-00 110/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

prosecute credible claims of hate crimes and criminal hate speech. Finally, the Committee was concerned about reports of the persistent practice of racial profiling of Roma by the police.

Or. en

Amendment 206 Soraya Post, Josef Weidenholzer

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(50) In its concluding observations of 5 (50) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about Committee expressed concerns about reports that the Roma community reports that the Roma community continues to suffer from widespread continues to suffer from widespread discrimination and exclusion, discrimination and exclusion, unemployment, housing and educational unemployment, housing and educational segregation. It is particularly concerned segregation. It is particularly concerned that, notwithstanding the Public Education that, notwithstanding the Public Education Act, segregation in schools, especially Act, segregation in schools, especially church and private schools, remains church and private schools, remains prevalent and the number of Roma children prevalent and the number of Roma children placed in schools for children with mild placed in schools for children with mild disabilities remains disproportionately disabilities remains disproportionately high. It also mentioned concerns about the high. It also mentioned concerns about the prevalence of hate crimes and about hate prevalence of hate crimes and about hate speech in political discourse, the media and speech in political discourse, the media and on the internet targeting minorities, in on the internet targeting minorities, in particular Roma, Muslims, migrants and particular Roma, Muslims, migrants and refugees, including in the context of refugees, including in the context of government-sponsored campaigns. The government-sponsored campaigns - Committee expressed its concern over the financed with public money – which have prevalence of anti-Semitic stereotypes. The featured fear-mongering and Committee also noted with concern Islamophobic statements and pictures, allegations that the number of registered and led to increased intolerance against hate crimes is extremely low because the Muslims, migrants and people perceived police often fail to investigate and as such. The Committee expressed its prosecute credible claims of hate crimes concern over the prevalence of anti-Semitic and criminal hate speech. Finally, the stereotypes. The Committee also noted Committee was concerned about reports of with concern allegations that the number of the persistent practice of racial profiling of registered hate crimes is extremely low

AM\1157114EN.docx 111/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Roma by the police. because the police often fail to investigate and prosecute credible claims of hate crimes and criminal hate speech. Finally, the Committee was concerned about reports of the persistent practice of racial profiling of Roma by the police. Roma in Hungary, especially in rural areas, are also subject to disproportionate and discriminatory practices by the police. In a case regarding the village of Gyöngyöspata, the HCLU initiated an action popularis lawsuit based on the Equal Treatment Act to denounce the local police that was solely giving fines to Roma for minor traffic offences. The first instance judgement found that the practice constituted harassment and direct discrimination against the Roma even if the individual measures were lawful. The second instance court and the Supreme Court ruled that HCLU could not substantiate discrimination, misusing the special rules on burden of proof. HCLU turned to ECHR concerning the rules on burden of proof and the right to appeal.

Or. en

Amendment 207 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 112/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

prevalent and the number of Roma children prevalent and the number of Roma children placed in schools for children with mild placed in schools for children with mild disabilities remains disproportionately disabilities remains disproportionately high. It also mentioned concerns about the high. It also mentioned concerns about the prevalence of hate crimes and about hate prevalence of hate crimes and about hate speech in political discourse, the media and speech in political discourse, the media and on the internet targeting minorities, in on the internet targeting minorities, in particular Roma, Muslims, migrants and particular Roma, Muslims, migrants and refugees, including in the context of refugees, including in the context of government-sponsored campaigns. The government-sponsored campaigns. The Committee expressed its concern over the Committee expressed its concern over the prevalence of anti-Semitic stereotypes. The prevalence of anti-Semitic stereotypes. The Committee also noted with concern Committee also noted with concern allegations that the number of registered allegations that the number of registered hate crimes is extremely low because the hate crimes is extremely low because the police often fail to investigate and police often fail to investigate and prosecute credible claims of hate crimes prosecute credible claims of hate crimes and criminal hate speech. Finally, the and criminal hate speech. Finally, the Committee was concerned about reports of Committee was concerned about reports of the persistent practice of racial profiling of the persistent practice of racial profiling of Roma by the police. Roma by the police. The Fundamental Rights Officer of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency visited Hungary in October 2016 and in March 2017 to check that the conditions under which the Agency operates allow it to ensure the respect, protection and enforcement of the rights of persons crossing the Hungarian- Serbian border. These conditions involve the risk of a de facto violation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The Fundamental Rights Officer concluded in March 2017 that the risk of the Agency bearing a share of the responsibility in the event of a violation of fundamental rights, in accordance with Article 34 of the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation, remains very high.

Or. fr

Amendment 208 Kinga Gál

AM\1157114EN.docx 113/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(50) In its concluding observations of 5 (50) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about Committee expressed concerns about the reports that the Roma community prevalence of hate crimes and about hate continues to suffer from widespread speech in political discourse, the media and discrimination and exclusion, on the internet targeting minorities, in unemployment, housing and educational particular Roma, Muslims, migrants and segregation. It is particularly concerned refugees, including in the context of that, notwithstanding the Public government-sponsored campaigns. The Education Act, segregation in schools, Committee expressed its concern over the especially church and private schools, prevalence of anti-Semitic stereotypes. The remains prevalent and the number of Committee also noted with concern Roma children placed in schools for allegations that the number of registered children with mild disabilities remains hate crimes is extremely low because the disproportionately high. It also mentioned police often fail to investigate and concerns about the prevalence of hate prosecute credible claims of hate crimes crimes and about hate speech in political and criminal hate speech. Finally, the discourse, the media and on the internet Committee was concerned about reports of targeting minorities, in particular Roma, the persistent practice of racial profiling of Muslims, migrants and refugees, including Roma by the police. Hungary however has in the context of government-sponsored enacted powerful legal instruments to campaigns. The Committee expressed its combat hate crimes and hate speech; the concern over the prevalence of anti-Semitic Hungarian Penal Code strictly punishes stereotypes. The Committee also noted inciting violence or hatred against a with concern allegations that the number of member of a community, as well as the registered hate crimes is extremely low public denial of Holocaust, and the because the police often fail to investigate Government has established a Working and prosecute credible claims of hate Group Against Hate Crime providing crimes and criminal hate speech. Finally, training for police officers and helping the Committee was concerned about victims to cooperate with the police and reports of the persistent practice of racial report incidents. By reason of the Fourth profiling of Roma by the police. Amendment of the Fundamental Law the ‘freedom of expression may not be exercised with the aim of violating the dignity of the Hungarian nation or of any national, ethnic, racial or religious community’; the amendment has been greeted as a historic step by many – in particular by Jewish – communities, as it makes the fight against hate speech more efficient.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 114/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 209 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 50

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(50) In its concluding observations of 5 (50) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about Committee expressed concerns about reports that the Roma community reports that the Roma community continues to suffer from widespread continues to suffer from widespread discrimination and exclusion, discrimination and exclusion, unemployment, housing and educational unemployment, housing and educational segregation. It is particularly concerned segregation. It is particularly concerned that, notwithstanding the Public Education that, notwithstanding the Public Education Act, segregation in schools, especially Act, segregation in schools, especially church and private schools, remains church and private schools, remains prevalent and the number of Roma children prevalent and the number of Roma children placed in schools for children with mild placed in schools for children with mild disabilities remains disproportionately disabilities remains disproportionately high. It also mentioned concerns about high. Despite the sporadic occurrence of the prevalence of hate crimes and about segregation of Roma children, like in hate speech in political discourse, the several other Member States, Hungary media and on the internet targeting has introduced convincing legal, minorities, in particular Roma, Muslims, financing and institutional measures and migrants and refugees, including in the a number of government actions to context of government-sponsored facilitate access to quality education for campaigns. The Committee expressed its Roma children. The Hungarian Inclusion concern over the prevalence of anti- Strategy for example focuses on Semitic stereotypes. The Committee also promoting integrated education, reducing noted with concern allegations that the segregation, breaking the number of registered hate crimes is intergenerational transmission of extremely low because the police often fail disadvantages, and establishing an to investigate and prosecute credible inclusive school environment. claims of hate crimes and criminal hate Furthermore, the Act on National Public speech. Finally, the Committee was Education was extended with additional concerned about reports of the persistent guarantees as of January 2017, and the practice of racial profiling of Roma by the Hungarian Government initiated official police. audits in 2011-2015, followed by actions by government offices.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 115/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 210 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 50 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(50a) On 23 February 2018, three organisations - the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (HCLU), the Validity Foundation and the European Network on Independent Living - asked the Hungarian government and the Commission to suspend and reformulate projects aimed at removing people from specialised institutions funded by the Commission and managed by the Hungarian government. The estimated cost of these projects affecting 2 500 persons with disabilities is HUF 24 billion (EUR 76 million). The analysis of the projects by these organisations shows a violation of EU funding rules, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the obligations of Hungary under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Or. fr

Amendment 211 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Birgit Sippel, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 51

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 116/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Hungary violated international law by its Hungary violated international law by its treatment of refugees and migrants. On 27 treatment of refugees and migrants. On 27 November 2015, the Council of Europe November 2015, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights made a Commissioner for Human Rights made a statement that Hungary’s response to the statement that Hungary’s response to the refugee challenge falls short on human refugee challenge falls short on human rights. On 21 December 2015, the UN rights. On 21 December 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the High Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of Europe and the OSCE Office Council of Europe and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights urged Hungary to refrain from Rights urged Hungary to refrain from policies and practices that promote policies and practices that promote intolerance and fear and fuel xenophobia intolerance and fear and fuel xenophobia against refugees and migrants. On 6 June against refugees and migrants. On 6 June 2016, the UN High Commissioner for 2016, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed concerns about the Refugees expressed concerns about the increasing number of allegations of abuse increasing number of allegations of abuse in Hungary against asylum-seekers and in Hungary against asylum-seekers and migrants by border authorities, and the migrants by border authorities, and the broader restrictive border and legislative broader restrictive border and legislative measures, including access to asylum measures, including access to asylum procedures. procedures. The Fundamental Rights Officer of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency visited Hungary in October 2016 as well as in March 2017, owing to the Officer’s concern that the Agency might be operating under conditions which do not commit to the respect, protection and fulfilment of the rights of persons crossing the Hungarian-Serbian border, that may put the Agency in situations that de facto violate the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The Fundamental Rights Officer concluded in March2017 that the risk of shared responsibility of the Agency in the violation of fundamental rights in accordance with Article 34 of the European Border and Coast Guard Regulation remains very high.

Or. en

Amendment 212 Kinga Gál

AM\1157114EN.docx 117/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 51

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(51) On 3 July 2015, the UN High (51) On 3 July 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed Commissioner for Refugees expressed concerns about the fast-track procedure for concerns about the fast-track procedure for amending asylum law. On 17 September amending asylum law. The extraordinary 2015, the UN High Commissioner for circumstances and emergency situation Human Rights expressed his opinion that urged the Hungarian Government to Hungary violated international law by its address the situation with quick legal treatment of refugees and migrants. On 27 responses and despite the urgent November 2015, the Council of Europe government actions, each application for Commissioner for Human Rights made a international protection is thoroughly statement that Hungary’s response to the examined on an individual basis. On 17 refugee challenge falls short on human September 2015, the UN High rights. On 21 December 2015, the UN Commissioner for Human Rights High Commissioner for Refugees, the expressed his opinion that Hungary Council of Europe and the OSCE Office violated international law by its treatment for Democratic Institutions and Human of refugees and migrants. On 27 November Rights urged Hungary to refrain from 2015, the Council of Europe Commissioner policies and practices that promote for Human Rights made a statement that intolerance and fear and fuel xenophobia Hungary’s response to the refugee against refugees and migrants. On 6 June challenge falls short on human rights. On 2016, the UN High Commissioner for 21 December 2015, the UN High Refugees expressed concerns about the Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of increasing number of allegations of abuse Europe and the OSCE Office for in Hungary against asylum-seekers and Democratic Institutions and Human Rights migrants by border authorities, and the urged Hungary to refrain from policies and broader restrictive border and legislative practices that promote intolerance and fear measures, including access to asylum and fuel xenophobia against refugees and procedures. migrants. On 6 June 2016, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed concerns about the increasing number of allegations of abuse in Hungary against asylum-seekers and migrants by border authorities, and the broader restrictive border and legislative measures, including access to asylum procedures. However, no court case has so far been reported where Hungarian border police officers have been charged of abusing asylum seekers.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 118/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 213 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Birgit Sippel

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 51

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(51) On 3 July 2015, the UN High (51) On 3 July 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed Commissioner for Refugees expressed concerns about the fast-track procedure for concerns about the fast-track procedure for amending asylum law. On 17 September amending asylum law. On 17 September 2015, the UN High Commissioner for 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed his opinion that Human Rights expressed his opinion that Hungary violated international law by its Hungary violated international law by its treatment of refugees and migrants. On 27 treatment of refugees and migrants. On 27 November 2015, the Council of Europe November 2015, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights made a Commissioner for Human Rights made a statement that Hungary’s response to the statement that Hungary’s response to the refugee challenge falls short on human refugee challenge falls short on human rights. On 21 December 2015, the UN rights. On 21 December 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the High Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of Europe and the OSCE Office Council of Europe and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights urged Hungary to refrain from Rights urged Hungary to refrain from policies and practices that promote policies and practices that promote intolerance and fear and fuel xenophobia intolerance and fear and fuel xenophobia against refugees and migrants. On 6 June against refugees and migrants. On 6 June 2016, the UN High Commissioner for 2016, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed concerns about the Refugees expressed concerns about the increasing number of allegations of abuse increasing number of allegations of abuse in Hungary against asylum-seekers and in Hungary against asylum-seekers and migrants by border authorities, and the migrants by border authorities, and the broader restrictive border and legislative broader restrictive border and legislative measures, including access to asylum measures, including access to asylum procedures. procedures. Given the worsening situation of asylum-seekers in Hungary the UN Refugee Agency called on 10 April 2017 for a temporary suspension of all transfers of asylum-seekers to Hungary from other European States under the Dublin Regulation.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 119/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 214 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 51

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(51) On 3 July 2015, the UN High (51) On 3 July 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed Commissioner for Refugees expressed concerns about the fast-track procedure for concerns about the fast-track procedure for amending asylum law. On 17 September amending asylum law. On 17 September 2015, the UN High Commissioner for 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed his opinion that Human Rights expressed his opinion that Hungary violated international law by its Hungary violated international law by its treatment of refugees and migrants. On 27 treatment of refugees and migrants. On 27 November 2015, the Council of Europe November 2015, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights made a Commissioner for Human Rights made a statement that Hungary’s response to the statement that Hungary’s response to the refugee challenge falls short on human refugee challenge falls short on human rights. On 21 December 2015, the UN rights. On 21 December 2015, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the High Commissioner for Refugees, the Council of Europe and the OSCE Office Council of Europe and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights urged Hungary to refrain from Rights urged Hungary to refrain from policies and practices that promote policies and practices that promote intolerance and fear and fuel xenophobia intolerance and fear and fuel xenophobia against refugees and migrants. On 6 June against refugees and migrants. On 6 June 2016, the UN High Commissioner for 2016, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed concerns about the Refugees expressed concerns about the increasing number of allegations of abuse increasing number of allegations of abuse in Hungary against asylum-seekers and in Hungary against asylum-seekers and migrants by border authorities, and the migrants by border authorities, and the broader restrictive border and legislative broader restrictive border and legislative measures, including access to asylum measures, including access to asylum procedures. procedures. On 10 April 2017, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees called for an immediate suspension of Dublin transfers to Hungary.

Or. fr

Amendment 215 Marie-Christine Vergiat

PE622.146v02-00 120/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 51 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(51a) In 2015, out of 480 judicial appeals relating to applications for international protection, there were 40 positive decisions, i.e. 9%. In 2016, for 775 appeals, there were 5 positive decisions, i.e. 1% while there were 0 appeals in 2017. While there is no reason to question the independence of the judiciary in Hungary as a whole and in particular the courts of first instance, this trend in the rate of rejections of applications for international protection raises concerns about the autonomy and the role of judges of the second instance.

Or. fr

Amendment 216 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 52

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(52) On 3 July 2014, the UN Working (52) On 3 July 2014, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention indicated Group on Arbitrary Detention indicated that the situation of asylum seekers and that the situation of asylum seekers and migrants in irregular situations needs migrants in irregular situations needs robust improvements and attention to robust improvements and attention to ensure against arbitrary deprivation of ensure against arbitrary deprivation of liberty. Similar concerns about detention, liberty. Similar concerns about detention, in particular of unaccompanied minors, in particular of unaccompanied minors, have been shared by the Council of have been shared by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in the report following his visit to Hungary, in the report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 December which was published on 16 December 2014. On 21-27 October 2015 the 2014. On 21-27 October 2015 the European Committee for the Prevention of European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) visited Treatment or Punishment (CPT) visited Hungary and indicated in its report a Hungary and indicated in its report a

AM\1157114EN.docx 121/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

considerable number of foreign nationals’ considerable number of foreign nationals’ (including unaccompanied minors) claims (including unaccompanied minors) claims that they had been subjected to physical ill- that they had been subjected to physical ill- treatment by police officers and armed treatment by police officers and armed guards working in immigration or asylum guards working in immigration or asylum detention facilities. On 7 March 2017, the detention facilities. On 7 March 2017, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed his concerns about a new law expressed his concerns about a new law voted in the Hungarian Parliament voted in the Hungarian Parliament envisaging the mandatory detention of all envisaging the mandatory detention of all asylum seekers, including children, for the asylum seekers, including children, for the entire length of the asylum procedure. On 8 entire length of the asylum procedure. On 8 March 2017, the Council of Europe March 2017, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights issued a Commissioner for Human Rights issued a statement similarly expressing his concern statement similarly expressing his concern about that law. On 31 March 2017, the UN about that law. On 31 March 2017, the UN Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture urged Hungary to address immediately the urged Hungary to address immediately the excessive use of detention. excessive use of detention. Despite all this, asylum seekers in Hungary are not detained or deprived of their liberty since they can leave the transit zone freely at any time. Pursuant to the Directive2013/33/EU, Member States may designate such areas not only based on considerations of public interest and public order, but also to ensure the availability of applicants during the procedure; this measure is also permitted by Article 72 TFEU.

Or. en

Amendment 217 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 52

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 122/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

liberty. Similar concerns about detention, liberty. Similar concerns about detention, in particular of unaccompanied minors, in particular of unaccompanied minors, have been shared by the Council of have been shared by the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights in the report following his visit to Hungary, in the report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 December which was published on 16 December 2014. On 21-27 October 2015 the 2014. On 21-27 October 2015 the European Committee for the Prevention of European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) visited Treatment or Punishment (CPT) visited Hungary and indicated in its report a Hungary and indicated in its report a considerable number of foreign nationals’ considerable number of foreign nationals’ (including unaccompanied minors) claims (including unaccompanied minors) claims that they had been subjected to physical ill- that they had been subjected to physical ill- treatment by police officers and armed treatment by police officers and armed guards working in immigration or asylum guards working in immigration or asylum detention facilities. On 7 March 2017, the detention facilities. On 7 March 2017, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees UN High Commissioner for Refugees expressed his concerns about a new law expressed his concerns about a new law voted in the Hungarian Parliament voted in the Hungarian Parliament envisaging the mandatory detention of all envisaging the mandatory detention of all asylum seekers, including children, for the asylum seekers, including children, for the entire length of the asylum procedure. On 8 entire length of the asylum procedure. On 8 March 2017, the Council of Europe March 2017, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights issued a Commissioner for Human Rights issued a statement similarly expressing his concern statement similarly expressing his concern about that law. On 31 March 2017, the UN about that law. On 31 March 2017, the UN Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture urged Hungary to address immediately the urged Hungary to address immediately the excessive use of detention. excessive use of detention and explore alternatives. Coercive measures and use of force in the processing of migrants falls short of European standards and should be improved at the earliest possible opportunity. Furthermore, in case of insufficient capacity or lack of resources the appropriate authorities should seek assistance from European Boarder and Coast Guard Agency.

Or. en

Amendment 218 Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo Castaldo

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 52 a (new)

AM\1157114EN.docx 123/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(52a) In its first report on Hungary’s implementation of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, published in May 2015, the Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA) found that insufficient measures had been taken to identify possible human trafficking victims among asylum seekers and irregular migrants. In its latest report, published in March 2018, GRETA again criticised Hungary for its inability and unwillingness to detect potential victims of trafficking in human beings among migrants and asylum seekers in the country and called on the Hungarian authorities to adopt a legal framework for the identification of victims of human trafficking among third country nationals who were not legally resident and to step up its procedures for identifying victims of such trafficking among asylum seekers and irregular migrants.

Or. it

Amendment 219 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 52 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(52a) In its judgment of 5 July 2016, O.M. v. Hungary, the European Court of Human Rights found that here had been a violation of the applicant's right to freedom and security, in particular a failure to take into account the applicant's vulnerability in a closed centre because of his sexual orientation.

PE622.146v02-00 124/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Or. fr

Amendment 220 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 53

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(53) On 12-16 June 2017, the Special (53) On 12-16 June 2017, the Special Representative of the Secretary General of Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe on migration and the Council of Europe on migration and refugees visited Serbia and two transit refugees visited Serbia and two transit zones in Hungary. In his report, the Special zones in Hungary. In his report, the Special Representative made several Representative made several recommendations, including a call on the recommendations, including a call on the Hungarian authorities to take the necessary Hungarian authorities to take the necessary measures, including by reviewing the measures, including by reviewing the relevant legislative framework and relevant legislative framework and changing relevant practices, to ensure that changing relevant practices, to ensure that all foreign nationals arriving at the border all foreign nationals arriving at the border or who are on Hungarian territory are not or who are on Hungarian territory are not deterred from making an application for deterred from making an application for international protection. On 5-7 July a international protection. On 5-7 July a delegation of the Council of Europe delegation of the Council of Europe Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the Parties to the Council of Europe Parties to the Council of Europe Convention on the protection of children Convention on the protection of children against sexual exploitation and sexual against sexual exploitation and sexual abuse) also visited two transit zones and abuse) also visited two transit zones and made a number of recommendations, made a number of recommendations, including a call to treat all persons under including a call to treat all persons under the age of 18 years of age as children the age of 18 years of age as children without discrimination on the ground of without discrimination on the ground of their age, to ensure that all children under their age, to ensure that all children under Hungarian jurisdiction are protected Hungarian jurisdiction are protected against sexual exploitation and abuse, and against sexual exploitation and abuse, and to systematically place them in mainstream to systematically place them in mainstream child protection institutions in order to child protection institutions in order to prevent possible sexual exploitation or prevent possible sexual exploitation or sexual abuse against them by adults and sexual abuse against them by adults and adolescents in the transit zones. adolescents in the transit zones. Hungary pays special attention to the needs of different age and social groups, including but not limited to separated placement, 24/7 presence of social workers, separate

AM\1157114EN.docx 125/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

accommodation facilities for both families and unaccompanied minors, continuous security service and CCTV video surveillance system to ensure the prevention of any kind of violence, sexual exploitation or abuse. Hungarian authorities trained experts for the successful identification of victims of human trafficking (including sexual exploitation) and unaccompanied children are under supervision by social workers 24 hours a day. Between the age of 14 and 18, three meals a day as well as clothing, health care, education, and religious practice are provided in transit zones and children under the age of 14 are placed in special care institutions inside the country where they get five meals a day. Furthermore, as from 1st January2018 additional regulations were introduced favouring minors in general and unaccompanied minors in specific; among others a specific curriculum was developed for minor asylum seekers.

Or. en

Amendment 221 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 53

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 126/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

or who are on Hungarian territory are not admission of asylum seekers in the Röszke deterred from making an application for and Tompa transit areas often encourage international protection. On 5-7 July a asylum seekers to seek illegal means of delegation of the Council of Europe crossing the border, using traffickers. Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the The Special Representative concluded Parties to the Council of Europe that Hungarian legislation and practices Convention on the protection of children needed to be aligned with the against sexual exploitation and sexual requirements of the ECHR. In his report, abuse) also visited two transit zones and the Special Representative made several made a number of recommendations, recommendations, including a call on the including a call to treat all persons under Hungarian authorities to take the necessary the age of 18 years of age as children measures, including by reviewing the without discrimination on the ground of relevant legislative framework and their age, to ensure that all children under changing relevant practices, to ensure that Hungarian jurisdiction are protected all foreign nationals arriving at the border against sexual exploitation and abuse, and or who are on Hungarian territory are not to systematically place them in mainstream deterred from making an application for child protection institutions in order to international protection. On 5-7 July a prevent possible sexual exploitation or delegation of the Council of Europe sexual abuse against them by adults and Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the adolescents in the transit zones. Parties to the Council of Europe Convention on the protection of children against sexual exploitation and sexual abuse) also visited two transit zones and made a number of recommendations, including a call to treat all persons under the age of 18 years of age as children without discrimination on the ground of their age, to ensure that all children under Hungarian jurisdiction are protected against sexual exploitation and abuse, and to systematically place them in mainstream child protection institutions in order to prevent possible sexual exploitation or sexual abuse against them by adults and adolescents in the transit zones.

Or. fr

Amendment 222 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Birgit Sippel, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 53

AM\1157114EN.docx 127/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(53) On 12-16 June 2017, the Special (53) On 12-16 June 2017, the Special Representative of the Secretary General of Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe on migration and the Council of Europe on migration and refugees visited Serbia and two transit refugees visited Serbia and two transit zones in Hungary. In his report, the Special zones in Hungary. In his report, the Special Representative made several Representative made several recommendations, including a call on the recommendations, including a call on the Hungarian authorities to take the necessary Hungarian authorities to take the necessary measures, including by reviewing the measures, including by reviewing the relevant legislative framework and relevant legislative framework and changing relevant practices, to ensure that changing relevant practices, to ensure that all foreign nationals arriving at the border all foreign nationals arriving at the border or who are on Hungarian territory are not or who are on Hungarian territory are not deterred from making an application for deterred from making an application for international protection. On 5-7 July a international protection. In his report, the delegation of the Council of Europe Special Representative stated that violent Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the pushbacks of migrants and refugees from Parties to the Council of Europe Hungary to Serbia raise concerns under Convention on the protection of children Articles 2 (the right to life) and 3 against sexual exploitation and sexual (prohibition of torture) of the ECHR. The abuse) also visited two transit zones and Special Representative also noted that the made a number of recommendations, restrictive practices of admission of including a call to treat all persons under asylum-seekers into the transit zones of the age of 18 years of age as children Röszke and Tompa often make asylum- without discrimination on the ground of seekers look for illegal ways of crossing their age, to ensure that all children under the border, having to resort to smugglers Hungarian jurisdiction are protected and traffickers with all the risks that this against sexual exploitation and abuse, and entails. The Special Representative to systematically place them in mainstream concluded that it is necessary that the child protection institutions in order to Hungarian legislation and practices are prevent possible sexual exploitation or brought in line with the requirements of sexual abuse against them by adults and the ECHR. On 5-7 July a delegation of the adolescents in the transit zones. Council of Europe Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the Parties to the Council of Europe Convention on the protection of children against sexual exploitation and sexual abuse) also visited two transit zones and made a number of recommendations, including a call to treat all persons under the age of 18 years of age as children without discrimination on the ground of their age, to ensure that all children under Hungarian jurisdiction are protected against sexual exploitation and abuse, and to systematically place them in mainstream child protection institutions in order to

PE622.146v02-00 128/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

prevent possible sexual exploitation or sexual abuse against them by adults and adolescents in the transit zones.

Or. en

Amendment 223 Judith Sargentini

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 53

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(53) On 12-16 June 2017, the Special (53) On 12-16 June 2017, the Special Representative of the Secretary General of Representative of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe on migration and the Council of Europe on migration and refugees visited Serbia and two transit refugees visited Serbia and two transit zones in Hungary. In his report, the Special zones in Hungary. In his report, the Special Representative made several Representative made several recommendations, including a call on the recommendations, including a call on the Hungarian authorities to take the necessary Hungarian authorities to take the necessary measures, including by reviewing the measures, including by reviewing the relevant legislative framework and relevant legislative framework and changing relevant practices, to ensure that changing relevant practices, to ensure that all foreign nationals arriving at the border all foreign nationals arriving at the border or who are on Hungarian territory are not or who are on Hungarian territory are not deterred from making an application for deterred from making an application for international protection. On 5-7 July a international protection. On 5-7 July 2017, delegation of the Council of Europe a delegation of the Council of Europe Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the Lanzarote Committee (Committee of the Parties to the Council of Europe Parties to the Council of Europe Convention on the protection of children Convention on the protection of children against sexual exploitation and sexual against sexual exploitation and sexual abuse) also visited two transit zones and abuse) also visited two transit zones and made a number of recommendations, made a number of recommendations, including a call to treat all persons under including a call to treat all persons under the age of 18 years of age as children the age of 18 years of age as children without discrimination on the ground of without discrimination on the ground of their age, to ensure that all children under their age, to ensure that all children under Hungarian jurisdiction are protected Hungarian jurisdiction are protected against sexual exploitation and abuse, and against sexual exploitation and abuse, and to systematically place them in mainstream to systematically place them in mainstream child protection institutions in order to child protection institutions in order to prevent possible sexual exploitation or prevent possible sexual exploitation or sexual abuse against them by adults and sexual abuse against them by adults and adolescents in the transit zones. On 18-20

AM\1157114EN.docx 129/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

adolescents in the transit zones. December 2017, a delegation of the Council of Europe Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (GRETA) visited Hungary, including two transit zones, and concluded that a transit zone, which is effectively a place of deprivation of liberty, cannot be considered as appropriate and safe accommodation for victims of trafficking.

Or. en

Amendment 224 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 53

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 130/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Hungarian jurisdiction are protected Hungarian jurisdiction are protected against sexual exploitation and abuse, and against sexual exploitation and abuse, and to systematically place them in mainstream to systematically place them in mainstream child protection institutions in order to child protection institutions in order to prevent possible sexual exploitation or prevent possible sexual exploitation or sexual abuse against them by adults and sexual abuse against them by adults and adolescents in the transit zones. adolescents in the transit zones. However, relevant reports highlighted the fact that thousands of unaccompanied minors disappeared during their illegal journey towards the Western EU Member States, therefore the placement of minors between 14 and 18 years of age should be considered in line with their primary interest to avoid them being victims of human smuggling and human trafficking.

Or. en

Amendment 225 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 54

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(54) In its judgment of 14 March 2017, (54) In its judgment of 14 March 2017, Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, the ECtHR Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that there had been a violation of the found that there had been a violation of the applicants’ right to liberty and security. applicants’ right to liberty and security. The ECtHR also found that there had been The ECtHR also found that there had been a violation of the prohibition of inhuman or a violation of the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment in respect of the degrading treatment in respect of the applicants’ expulsion to Serbia, as well as a applicants’ expulsion to Serbia, as well as a violation of the right to an effective remedy violation of the right to an effective remedy in respect of the conditions of detention at in respect of the conditions of detention at the Röszke transit zone. The case is the Röszke transit zone. The case is currently pending before the Grand currently pending before the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR. Chamber of the ECtHR. It must be highlighted that the case raises serious issues of general importance affecting the interpretation and application of the Convention and the legal order of several High Contracting Parties, as well as poses serious social challenges, since the legal interpretation favouring asylum-shopping

AM\1157114EN.docx 131/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

would pave the way for potential abuses with international protection and would adversely affect the merit of refugee status. It would further contradict the explicitly reiterated principles in the ECtHR’s legal practice recognising the right of states to control the entry and stay of aliens on their territories.

Or. en

Amendment 226 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 54

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(54) In its judgment of 14 March 2017, (54) In its judgment of 14 March 2017, Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, the ECtHR Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, the ECtHR at found that there had been a violation of the first instance found that there had been a applicants’ right to liberty and security. violation of the applicants’ right to liberty The ECtHR also found that there had been and security. The ECtHR at first instance a violation of the prohibition of inhuman or also found that there had been a violation degrading treatment in respect of the of the prohibition of inhuman or degrading applicants’ expulsion to Serbia, as well as a treatment in respect of the applicants’ violation of the right to an effective remedy expulsion to Serbia, as well as a violation in respect of the conditions of detention at of the right to an effective remedy in the Röszke transit zone. The case is respect of the conditions of detention at the currently pending before the Grand Röszke transit zone. The case is currently Chamber of the ECtHR. pending before the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR and therefore it is vital to refrain from prejudging its outcome and thereby attempting to influence the final decision of the ECtHR. The primary responsibility lies with the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR in determining whether or not the right to asylum-shopping shall be recognised by international law.

Or. en

Amendment 227 Marie-Christine Vergiat

PE622.146v02-00 132/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 54 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(54a) On 14 March 2018, Ahmed H., a Syrian resident in Cyprus who had tried to help his family flee Syria and cross the Serbian-Hungarian border in September 2015, was sentenced by a Hungarian court to 7 years' imprisonment and 10 years expulsion from the country on the basis of charges of ‘terrorist acts’; this condemnation questions the application of the laws against terrorism in Hungary as well as the right to a fair trial;

Or. fr

Amendment 228 Josef Weidenholzer, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Birgit Sippel, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 54 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(54a) In its judgment of 6 September 2017 in Case C-643/15 and C-647/15, the Court dismisses in their entirety the actions brought by Slovakia and Hungary against the provisional mechanism for the mandatory relocation of asylum seekers. Slovakia and Hungary voted against the adoption of the contested decision in the Council and have asked the Court of Justice to annul the decision.

Or. en

Amendment 229 Marie-Christine Vergiat

AM\1157114EN.docx 133/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 54 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(54b) On 6 September 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union rejected the legal proceedings initiated by Hungary and Slovakia against Council Decision 2015/1601 of 22 September 2015. However, since that decision, Hungary has not relocated a single asylum seeker and has not complied with the decision.

Or. fr

Amendment 230 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 54 c (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(54c) In 2017, out of 3397 applications for international protection filed in Hungary, 2880 applications were rejected - a very high rejection rate of 69.1%.

Or. fr

Amendment 231 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 55

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 134/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

by sending a reasoned opinion. The by sending a reasoned opinion. The Commission considers that the Hungarian Commission considers that the Hungarian legislation does not comply with Union legislation does not comply with Union law, in particular Directives 2013/32/EU5, law, in particular Directives 2013/32/EU5, 2008/115/EC6 and 2013/33/EU7 of the 2008/115/EC6 and 2013/33/EU7 of the European Parliament and of the Council European Parliament and of the Council and several provisions of the Charter. and several provisions of the Charter, although a crisis situation caused by mass immigration is a circumstance in which Article 72 TFEU entitles Member States ‘to exercise of the responsibilities incumbent upon Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security’ and the Asylum Procedures Directive enables Member States to determine the place for lodging the application for international protection in person. It must be underlined that applicants in Hungary cannot be considered to be in detention since everyone wishing to do so can leave the transit zone, only the admittance into the Schengen zone is not permitted until the necessary procedures are finished. In the course of the procedure however, the Hungarian Government is in continuous dialogue with the Commission in order to take into account the Commission’s concerns to the fullest possible extent and also the Commission has accepted several of the originally challenged Hungarian provisions to be in line with EU law. ______5 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European 5 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). 6 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European 6 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98). (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98). 7 Directive 2013/33/EU of the European 7 Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June Parliament and of the Council of 26 June

AM\1157114EN.docx 135/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

2013 laying down standards for the 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international reception of applicants for international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 96). protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 96).

Or. en

Amendment 232 Lívia Járóka

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 55

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(55) On 7 December 2017, the (55) On 7 December 2017, the Commission decided to move forward on Commission decided to move forward on the infringement procedure against the infringement procedure against Hungary concerning its asylum legislation Hungary concerning its asylum legislation by sending a reasoned opinion. The by sending a reasoned opinion. The Commission considers that the Hungarian Commission considers that the Hungarian legislation does not comply with Union legislation does not comply with Union law, in particular Directives 2013/32/EU5, law, in particular Directives 2013/32/EU5, 2008/115/EC6 and 2013/33/EU7 of the 2008/115/EC6 and 2013/33/EU7 of the European Parliament and of the Council European Parliament and of the Council and several provisions of the Charter. and several provisions of the Charter, although a crisis situation caused by mass immigration is a circumstance in which Article 72 TFEU entitles Member States ‘to exercise the responsibilities incumbent upon Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security’ and the Asylum Procedures Directive enables Member States to determine the place for lodging the application for international protection in person. It must be underlined that applicants in Hungary cannot be considered to be in detention since everyone wishing to do so can leave the transit zone, only the admittance into the Schengen zone is not permitted until the necessary procedures are finished. ______5 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European 5 Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting 2013 on common procedures for granting

PE622.146v02-00 136/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

and withdrawing international protection and withdrawing international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 60). 6 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European 6 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98). (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98). 7 Directive 2013/33/EU of the European 7 Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the 2013 laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international reception of applicants for international protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 96). protection (OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 96).

Or. en

Amendment 233 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 55 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(55a) In the AIDA (Asylum Information Database) report on Hungary updated on 31 December 2017, the Hungarian Helsinki Committee highlights several elements that violate respect of the right of asylum, in particular the failure to respect the right of a person to file an application for international protection in accordance with the Asylum Procedures Directive, the increasing number of reports of violence perpetrated at the Hungarian-Serbian border by the police, the lack of legal status of transit zones, the failure to respect the principle of access to an effective remedy under Article 13 of the ECHR, difficulties in accessing legal aid, non-compliance with the principle of non-refoulement enshrined in Article 3 of the ECHR, lack of identification procedures for vulnerable persons, practices of age assessment of unaccompanied minors

AM\1157114EN.docx 137/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

which fail to respect the fundamental rights of children.

Or. fr

Amendment 234 Laura Ferrara, Ignazio Corrao, Fabio Massimo Castaldo

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 55 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(55a) On 15 June 2017 the Commission initiated infringement proceedings against Hungary for failure to comply with its legal obligations under the temporary emergency relocation scheme, established under two Council decisions in September 2015 (Council Decision (EU) 2015/1523 and Council Decision (EU) 2015/1601). Despite confirmation by the Court of Justice of the European Union of the validity of the EU relocation scheme and of the EU’s right to require Member States to receive refugees, as expressed in its judgment of 6 September, Hungary has continued to infringe its legal obligations by refusing to contribute to the implementation of the relocation decisions. On 7 December 2017 the Commission decided to refer Hungary to the Court of Justice of the European Union on the grounds of its failure to comply with legal obligations concerning relocation.

Or. it

Amendment 235 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56

PE622.146v02-00 138/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(56) In its concluding observations of 5 (56) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that the Committee expressed concerns that the Hungarian law adopted in March 2017, Hungarian law adopted in March 2017, which allows for the automatic removal to which allows for the automatic removal to transit zones of all asylum applicants for transit zones of all asylum applicants for the duration of their asylum procedure, the duration of their asylum procedure, with the exception of unaccompanied with the exception of unaccompanied children identified as being below the age children identified as being below the age of 14, does not meet the legal standards as of 14,does not meet the legal standards as a a result of the lengthy and indefinite period result of the lengthy and indefinite period of confinement allowed, the absence of any of confinement allowed, the absence of any legal requirement to promptly examine the legal requirement to promptly examine the specific conditions of each affected specific conditions of each affected individual, and the lack of procedural individual, and the lack of procedural safeguards to meaningfully challenge safeguards to meaningfully challenge removal to the transit zones. The removal to the transit zones. The Committee was particularly concerned Committee was particularly concerned about reports of the extensive use of about reports of the extensive use of automatic immigration detention in holding automatic immigration detention in holding facilities inside Hungary and was facilities inside Hungary and was concerned that restrictions on personal concerned that restrictions on personal liberty have been used as a general liberty have been used as a general deterrent against unlawful entry rather than deterrent against unlawful entry rather than in response to an individualised in response to an individualised determination of risk. In addition, the determination of risk. In addition, the Committee was concerned about Committee was concerned about allegations of poor conditions in some allegations of poor conditions in some holding facilities. It noted with concern the holding facilities. It noted with concern the push-back law, which was first introduced push-back law, which was first introduced in June 2016, enabling summary expulsion in June 2016, enabling summary expulsion by the police of anyone who crosses the by the police of anyone who crosses the border irregularly and was detained on border irregularly and was detained on Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of the border, which was subsequently the border, which was subsequently extended to the entire territory of Hungary, extended to the entire territory of Hungary and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as in line with Article 72 TFEU, which a “safe third country” allowing for push- permits Member States to exercise their backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The powers, as regards maintaining public Committee noted with concern reports that order and internal security in mass push-backs have been applied migration crisis situations; Hungary indiscriminately and that individuals therefore, upon intercepting persons subjected to this measure have very limited inside the country but in connection with opportunity to submit an asylum an illegal border crossing, exercises its application or right to appeal. It also noted rights in line with Article 72 TFEU with a with concern reports of collective and view to maintain law and order and hence

AM\1157114EN.docx 139/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

violent expulsions, including allegations fulfils her obligations stemming from the of heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs Schengen Border Code. Decree 191/2015 and shootings with rubber bullets, designating Serbia as a “safe third country” resulting in severe injuries and, at least in allowing for push-backs at Hungary’s one case, in the loss of life of an asylum border with Serbia is fully in line with seeker. It was also concerned about reports international and EU standards, since that the age assessment of child asylum Serbia is a candidate country for EU seekers and unaccompanied minors membership and its accession to the conducted in the transit zones is European Union is underway; as there is inadequate, relies heavily on visual still no EU list determines safe third examination by an expert and is inaccurate, countries, Member States can freely and about reports alleging the lack of decide in this issue. The Committee noted adequate access by such asylum seekers to with concern reports that push-backs have education, social and psychological been applied indiscriminately and that services and legal aid. individuals subjected to this measure have very limited opportunity to submit an asylum application or right to appeal. It was also concerned about reports that the age assessment of child asylum seekers and unaccompanied minors conducted in the transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily on visual examination by an expert and is inaccurate and about reports alleging the lack of adequate access by such asylum seekers to education, social and psychological services and legal aid, whereas in reality the age assessment of minor asylum seekers is conducted by the medical staffs in the transit zones with scientific methods and the special needs of minors are fully addressed in line with international and EU standards. In accordance with the provisions of the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention, refugees have not only rights but also duties towards the country in which they find themselves which require, in particular, conforming to its laws and regulations as well as to the measures taken for the maintenance of public order.

Or. en

Amendment 236 Lívia Járóka

PE622.146v02-00 140/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(56) In its concluding observations of 5 (56) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that the Committee expressed concerns that the Hungarian law adopted in March 2017, Hungarian law adopted in March 2017, which allows for the automatic removal to which allows for the automatic removal to transit zones of all asylum applicants for transit zones of all asylum applicants for the duration of their asylum procedure, the duration of their asylum procedure, with the exception of unaccompanied with the exception of unaccompanied children identified as being below the age children identified as being below the age of 14, does not meet the legal standards as of 14,does not meet the legal standards as a a result of the lengthy and indefinite period result of the lengthy and indefinite period of confinement allowed, the absence of any of confinement allowed, the absence of any legal requirement to promptly examine the legal requirement to promptly examine the specific conditions of each affected specific conditions of each affected individual, and the lack of procedural individual, and the lack of procedural safeguards to meaningfully challenge safeguards to meaningfully challenge removal to the transit zones. The removal to the transit zones. Nevertheless, Committee was particularly concerned the term ‘transit zone’ defines solely the about reports of the extensive use of location rather than the type of the automatic immigration detention in holding procedure and the asylum procedures facilities inside Hungary and was conducted in the transit zones of Hungary concerned that restrictions on personal are equally full value ‘in merit’ liberty have been used as a general procedures. The Committee was deterrent against unlawful entry rather than particularly concerned about reports of the in response to an individualised extensive use of automatic immigration determination of risk. In addition, the detention in holding facilities inside Committee was concerned about Hungary and was concerned that allegations of poor conditions in some restrictions on personal liberty have been holding facilities. It noted with concern used as a general deterrent against the push-back law, which was first unlawful entry rather than in response to an introduced in June 2016, enabling individualised determination of risk. summary expulsion by the police of However, both the Asylum Procedure anyone who crosses the border irregularly Directive (2013/32/EU) and the Reception and was detained on Hungarian territory Directive (2013/33/EU) allows Member within 8 kilometres of the border, which States to require that applicants report to was subsequently extended to the entire the competent authorities or to appear in territory of Hungary, and decree 191/2015 front of them in person and the designating Serbia as a “safe third authorities may decide on their place of country” allowing for push-backs at residence. Hungary’s border with Serbia. The Committee noted with concern reports that push-backs have been applied indiscriminately and that individuals subjected to this measure have very

AM\1157114EN.docx 141/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

limited opportunity to submit an asylum application or right to appeal. It also noted with concern reports of collective and violent expulsions, including allegations of heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in severe injuries and, at least in one case, in the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was also concerned about reports that the age assessment of child asylum seekers and unaccompanied minors conducted in the transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily on visual examination by an expert and is inaccurate, and about reports alleging the lack of adequate access by such asylum seekers to education, social and psychological services and legal aid.

Or. en

Amendment 237 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 142/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

about reports of the extensive use of introduced in July 2016, enabling automatic immigration detention in holding summary expulsion by the police of facilities inside Hungary and was anyone who crosses the border irregularly concerned that restrictions on personal and is detained on Hungarian territory liberty have been used as a general within 8 kilometres of the border. The deterrent against unlawful entry rather than Committee noted with concern that in response to an individualised expulsions had been carried out determination of risk. In addition, the indiscriminately and that persons Committee was concerned about subjected to this measure were not able to allegations of poor conditions in some apply for asylum or to appeal against this holding facilities. It noted with concern the measure. The Committee was particularly push-back law, which was first introduced concerned about reports of the extensive in June 2016, enabling summary expulsion use of automatic immigration detention in by the police of anyone who crosses the holding facilities inside Hungary and was border irregularly and was detained on concerned that restrictions on personal Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of liberty have been used as a general the border, which was subsequently deterrent against unlawful entry rather than extended to the entire territory of Hungary, in response to an individualised and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as determination of risk. In addition, the a “safe third country” allowing for push- Committee was concerned about backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The allegations of poor conditions in some Committee noted with concern reports that holding facilities. It noted with concern the push-backs have been applied push-back law, which was first introduced indiscriminately and that individuals in June 2016, enabling summary expulsion subjected to this measure have very limited by the police of anyone who crosses the opportunity to submit an asylum border irregularly and was detained on application or right to appeal. It also noted Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of with concern reports of collective and the border, which was subsequently violent expulsions, including allegations of extended to the entire territory of Hungary, heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in a “safe third country” allowing for push- severe injuries and, at least in one case, in backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was Committee noted with concern reports that also concerned about reports that the age push-backs have been applied assessment of child asylum seekers and indiscriminately and that individuals unaccompanied minors conducted in the subjected to this measure have very limited transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily opportunity to submit an asylum on visual examination by an expert and is application or right to appeal. It also noted inaccurate, and about reports alleging the with concern reports of collective and lack of adequate access by such asylum violent expulsions, including allegations of seekers to education, social and heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and psychological services and legal aid. shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in severe injuries and, at least in one case, in the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was also concerned about reports that the age assessment of child asylum seekers and unaccompanied minors conducted in the transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily on visual examination by an expert and is

AM\1157114EN.docx 143/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

inaccurate, and about reports alleging the lack of adequate access by such asylum seekers to education, social and psychological services and legal aid.

Or. fr

Amendment 238 Barbara Kudrycka, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 144/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

border irregularly and was detained on border irregularly and was detained on Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of the border, which was subsequently the border, which was subsequently extended to the entire territory of Hungary, extended to the entire territory of Hungary, and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as a “safe third country” allowing for push- a “safe third country” allowing for push- backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The Committee noted with concern reports that Committee noted with concern reports that push-backs have been applied push-backs have been applied indiscriminately and that individuals indiscriminately and that individuals subjected to this measure have very limited subjected to this measure have very limited opportunity to submit an asylum opportunity to submit an asylum application or right to appeal. It also noted application or right to appeal. It also noted with concern reports of collective and with concern reports of collective and violent expulsions, including allegations of violent expulsions, including allegations of heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in severe injuries and, at least in one case, in severe injuries and, at least in one case, in the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was also concerned about reports that the age also concerned about reports that the age assessment of child asylum seekers and assessment of child asylum seekers and unaccompanied minors conducted in the unaccompanied minors conducted in the transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily on visual examination by an expert and is on visual examination by an expert and is inaccurate, and about reports alleging the inaccurate, and about reports alleging the lack of adequate access by such asylum lack of adequate access by such asylum seekers to education, social and seekers to education, social and psychological services and legal aid. psychological services and legal aid. Notes that now, according to the new the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common procedure for international protection in the Union and repealing Directive 2013/32/EU (COM(2016)0467 – C8-0321/2016 – 2016/0224(COD)) the medical age assessment will be a measure of a last resort. Therefore the Parliament calls on Hungary to provide proper age assessments of asylum seekers.

Or. en

Amendment 239 Monika Beňová

AM\1157114EN.docx 145/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(56) In its concluding observations of 5 (56) In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns that the Committee expressed concerns that the Hungarian law adopted in March 2017, Hungarian law adopted in March 2017, which allows for the automatic removal to which allows for the automatic removal to transit zones of all asylum applicants for transit zones of all asylum applicants for the duration of their asylum procedure, the duration of their asylum procedure, with the exception of unaccompanied with the exception of unaccompanied children identified as being below the age children identified as being below the age of 14, does not meet the legal standards as of 14, does not meet the legal standards as a result of the lengthy and indefinite period a result of the lengthy and indefinite period of confinement allowed, the absence of any of confinement allowed, the absence of any legal requirement to promptly examine the legal requirement to promptly examine the specific conditions of each affected specific conditions of each affected individual, and the lack of procedural individual, and the lack of procedural safeguards to meaningfully challenge safeguards to meaningfully challenge removal to the transit zones. The removal to the transit zones. The Committee was particularly concerned Committee was particularly concerned about reports of the extensive use of about reports of the extensive use of automatic immigration detention in holding automatic immigration detention in holding facilities inside Hungary and was facilities inside Hungary and was concerned that restrictions on personal concerned that restrictions on personal liberty have been used as a general liberty have been used as a general deterrent against unlawful entry rather than deterrent against unlawful entry rather than in response to an individualised in response to an individualised determination of risk. In addition, the determination of risk. In addition, the Committee was concerned about Committee was concerned about allegations of poor conditions in some allegations of poor conditions in some holding facilities. It noted with concern the holding facilities. It noted with concern the push-back law, which was first introduced push-back law, which was first introduced in June 2016, enabling summary expulsion in June 2016, enabling summary expulsion by the police of anyone who crosses the by the police of anyone who crosses the border irregularly and was detained on border irregularly and was detained on Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of Hungarian territory within 8 kilometres of the border, which was subsequently the border, which was subsequently extended to the entire territory of Hungary, extended to the entire territory of Hungary, and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as and decree 191/2015 designating Serbia as a “safe third country” allowing for push- a “safe third country” allowing for push- backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The backs at Hungary’s border with Serbia. The Committee noted with concern reports that Committee noted with concern reports that push-backs have been applied push-backs have been applied indiscriminately and that individuals indiscriminately and that individuals subjected to this measure have very limited subjected to this measure have very limited opportunity to submit an asylum opportunity to submit an asylum

PE622.146v02-00 146/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

application or right to appeal. It also noted application or right to appeal. It also noted with concern reports of collective and with concern reports of collective and violent expulsions, including allegations of violent expulsions, including allegations of heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and heavy beatings, attacks by police dogs and shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in shootings with rubber bullets, resulting in severe injuries and, at least in one case, in severe injuries and, at least in one case, in the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was the loss of life of an asylum seeker. It was also concerned about reports that the age also concerned about reports that the age assessment of child asylum seekers and assessment of child asylum seekers and unaccompanied minors conducted in the unaccompanied minors conducted in the transit zones is inadequate, relies heavily transit zones is not sufficiently thorough, on visual examination by an expert and is relies heavily on visual examination by an inaccurate, and about reports alleging the expert and is inaccurate, and about reports lack of adequate access by such asylum alleging the lack of adequate access by seekers to education, social and such asylum seekers to education, social psychological services and legal aid. and psychological services and legal aid.

Or. en

Amendment 240 Ana Gomes

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(56a) whereas, in March 2018, a Hungarian court upheld the sentence against Ahmed H, a Syrian refugee mischievously accused of carrying out terrorist acts at the border in 2015, under the prerogative of the country’s counter- terrorism laws, which have been widely criticised by civil society organisations and human rights groups as “draconian” and “vague”, and Amnesty International described the verdict as a “blatant misuse of terrorism-related provisions”; whereas the European Parliament has, in its 17 May 2017 Resolution, already recognised the trial as “unfair”; calls on the Hungarian authorities to stop the harassment and smear campaign against Ahmed H and ensure he receives a fair trial;

AM\1157114EN.docx 147/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Or. en

Amendment 241 Soraya Post, Josef Weidenholzer

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(56a) UN bodies and civil society have stated concerns about the constant association of migrants and Muslims with terrorism, which has led to discriminatory targeting of innocent people under counter-terrorism legislation. The confluence of draconian counter- terrorism laws and crackdown on refugees has led to at least in one instance the government misusing counter- terrorism legislation against a refugee who was helping his family go through the border. Ahmed H. was sentenced for 7 years in prison for an “act of terror.”

Or. en

Amendment 242 Josef Weidenholzer, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 56 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(56a) Is concerned about the mood in society which has been fuelled by the policies implemented in the recent years and the “tax financed” campaigns led by the government against refugees, minorities and other citizens.

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 148/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Amendment 243 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 57

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(57) In his report following his visit to deleted Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated his concern at measures taken to prohibit rough sleeping and the construction of huts and shacks, which have widely been described as criminalising homelessness in practice. The Commissioner urged the Hungarian authorities to investigate reported cases of forced evictions without alternative solutions and of children being taken away from their families on the grounds of poor socio-economic conditions. In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about state and local legislation, based on the Fourth Amendment to the Fundamental Law, which designates many public areas as out-of-bounds for “sleeping rough” and effectively punishes homelessness.

Or. en

Amendment 244 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 57

Motion for a resolution Amendment

AM\1157114EN.docx 149/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Commissioner for Human Rights indicated Commissioner for Human Rights indicated his concern at measures taken to prohibit his concern at measures taken to prohibit rough sleeping and the construction of huts rough sleeping and the construction of huts and shacks, which have widely been and shacks, which have widely been described as criminalising homelessness in described as criminalising homelessness in practice. The Commissioner urged the practice, which is arguably an Hungarian authorities to investigate overstatement considering that the reported cases of forced evictions without Fundamental Law of Hungary declares a alternative solutions and of children being dignified living as a goal of the state and taken away from their families on the thus includes a provision on taking care grounds of poor socio-economic of people without shelter and - in conditions. In its concluding observations accordance with the position of the of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights European Parliament- is aiming to Committee expressed concerns about state abolish homelessness affecting public and local legislation, based on the Fourth areas. The Commissioner urged the Amendment to the Fundamental Law, Hungarian authorities to investigate which designates many public areas as out- reported cases of forced evictions without of-bounds for “sleeping rough” and alternative solutions and of children being effectively punishes homelessness. taken away from their families on the grounds of poor socio-economic conditions. In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about state and local legislation, based on the Fourth Amendment to the Fundamental Law, which designates many public areas as out- of-bounds for “sleeping rough” and effectively punishes homelessness, whereas the prohibition of residing in public areas is not unique to Hungary but it is a common internationally accepted practice that homeless people are not allowed in certain public areas. Moreover, competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States. This issue clearly falls under the national competence of Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 245 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

PE622.146v02-00 150/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 57

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(57) In his report following his visit to (57) In his report following his visit to Hungary, which was published on 16 Hungary, which was published on 16 December 2014, the Council of Europe’s December 2014, the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights indicated Commissioner for Human Rights indicated his concern at measures taken to prohibit his concern at measures taken to prohibit rough sleeping and the construction of huts rough sleeping and the construction of huts and shacks, which have widely been and shacks, which have widely been described as criminalising homelessness in described as criminalising homelessness in practice. The Commissioner urged the practice. The Commissioner urged the Hungarian authorities to investigate Hungarian authorities to investigate reported cases of forced evictions without reported cases of forced evictions without alternative solutions and of children being alternative solutions and of children being taken away from their families on the taken away from their families on the grounds of poor socio-economic grounds of poor socio-economic conditions. In its concluding observations conditions. In its concluding observations of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights of 5 April 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concerns about state Committee expressed concerns about state and local legislation, based on the Fourth and local legislation, based on the Fourth Amendment to the Fundamental Law, Amendment to the Fundamental Law, which designates many public areas as out- which designates many public areas as out- of-bounds for “sleeping rough” and of-bounds for “sleeping rough” and effectively punishes homelessness. effectively punishes homelessness. On 15 February 2012 and 11 December 2012 the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) called on Hungary to reconsider legislation allowing local authorities to punish homelessness and to uphold the Constitutional Court’s decision decriminalising homelessness.

Or. en

Amendment 246 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58) The 2017 Conclusions of the deleted

AM\1157114EN.docx 151/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

European Committee of Social Rights stated that Hungary is not in compliance with the European Social Charter on the ground that self-employed and domestic workers, as well as other categories of workers, are not protected by occupational health and safety regulations, that measures taken to reduce the maternal mortality have been insufficient, that the minimum amount of old-age pensions is inadequate, that the minimum amount of jobseeker’s aid is inadequate, that the maximum duration of payment of jobseeker’s allowance is too short and that the minimum amount of rehabilitation and invalidity benefits, in certain cases, is inadequate. The Committee also concluded that in Hungary is not in conformity with the European Social Charter on the ground that the level of social assistance paid to a single person without resources, including elderly persons, is not adequate, on the ground that equal access to social services is not guaranteed for lawfully resident nationals of all States Parties and on the grounds that it has not been established that there is an adequate supply of housing for vulnerable families.

Or. en

Amendment 247 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58

Motion for a resolution Amendment

PE622.146v02-00 152/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

health and safety regulations, that measures health and safety regulations, that measures taken to reduce the maternal mortality have taken to reduce the maternal mortality have been insufficient, that the minimum been insufficient, that the minimum amount of old-age pensions is inadequate, amount of old-age pensions is inadequate, that the minimum amount of jobseeker’s that the minimum amount of jobseeker’s aid is inadequate, that the maximum aid is inadequate, that the maximum duration of payment of jobseeker’s duration of payment of jobseeker’s allowance is too short and that the allowance is too short and that the minimum amount of rehabilitation and minimum amount of rehabilitation and invalidity benefits, in certain cases, is invalidity benefits, in certain cases, is inadequate. The Committee also concluded inadequate. As far as this claim is that in Hungary is not in conformity with concerned, the Government of Hungary the European Social Charter on the ground considers the maintenance and increase that the level of social assistance paid to a in the number of jobs and the expansion single person without resources, including of employment as the primary task in the elderly persons, is not adequate, on the world of work; the government policy is ground that equal access to social services therefore linked to the relatively short is not guaranteed for lawfully resident duration of job-search support, aiming at nationals of all States Parties and on the encouraging active job search and grounds that it has not been established that improving labour market prospects for there is an adequate supply of housing for those who lose their jobs. The Committee vulnerable families. also concluded that in Hungary is not inconformity with the European Social Charter on the ground that the level of social assistance paid to a single person without resources, including elderly persons, is not adequate, on the ground that equal access to social services is not guaranteed for lawfully resident nationals of all States Parties and on the grounds that it has not been established that there is an adequate supply of housing for vulnerable families. Contrary to the special monitoring mechanisms related to the European Social Charter, Hungary has performed at or above the level of EU- average in 8 out of the 12 indicators of the renewed Social Scoreboard of the European Pillar of Social Rights, published by the European Commission. Moreover, competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States. This issue clearly falls under the national competence of Member States.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 153/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 248 Marie-Christine Vergiat

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58) The 2017 Conclusions of the (58) The 2017 Conclusions of the European Committee of Social Rights European Committee of Social Rights stated that Hungary is not in compliance stated that Hungary is not in compliance with the European Social Charter on the with the European Social Charter on the ground that self-employed and domestic ground that self-employed and domestic workers, as well as other categories of workers, as well as other categories of workers, are not protected by occupational workers, are not protected by occupational health and safety regulations, that measures health and safety regulations, that measures taken to reduce the maternal mortality have taken to reduce the maternal mortality have been insufficient, that the minimum been insufficient, that the minimum amount of old-age pensions is inadequate, amount of old-age pensions is inadequate, that the minimum amount of jobseeker’s that the minimum amount of jobseeker’s aid is inadequate, that the maximum aid is inadequate, that the maximum duration of payment of jobseeker’s duration of payment of jobseeker’s allowance is too short and that the allowance is too short and that the minimum amount of rehabilitation and minimum amount of rehabilitation and invalidity benefits, in certain cases, is invalidity benefits, in certain cases, is inadequate. The Committee also concluded inadequate. The Committee also concluded that in Hungary is not in conformity with that in Hungary is not in conformity with the European Social Charter on the ground the European Social Charter on the ground that the level of social assistance paid to a that the level of social assistance paid to a single person without resources, including single person without resources, including elderly persons, is not adequate, on the elderly persons, is not adequate, on the ground that equal access to social services ground that equal access to social services is not guaranteed for lawfully resident is not guaranteed for lawfully resident nationals of all States Parties and on the nationals of all States Parties and on the grounds that it has not been established that grounds that it has not been established that there is an adequate supply of housing for there is an adequate supply of housing for vulnerable families. vulnerable families. With regard to trade union rights, the Committee has stated that the right of workers to paid leave is not sufficiently secured, that no promotion measures have been taken to encourage the conclusion of collective agreements, while the protection of workers by such agreements is clearly weak in Hungary and in the civil service the right to call a strike is reserved to those unions which are parties to the agreement concluded with the government; the criteria used to

PE622.146v02-00 154/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

determine public servants who are denied the right to strike go beyond the scope of the Charter; public service unions can only call a strike with the approval of the majority of the staff concerned.

Or. fr

Amendment 249 Monika Beňová

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58) The 2017 Conclusions of the (58) The 2017 Conclusions of the European Committee of Social Rights European Committee of Social Rights stated that Hungary is not in compliance stated that Hungary is not in compliance with the European Social Charter on the with the European Social Charter on the ground that self-employed and domestic grounds that self-employed and domestic workers, as well as other categories of workers, as well as other categories of workers, are not protected by occupational workers, are not protected enough by health and safety regulations, that measures occupational health and safety regulations; taken to reduce the maternal mortality have that measures taken to reduce the maternal been insufficient, that the minimum mortality have been insufficient; that the amount of old-age pensions is inadequate, minimum amount of old-age pensions is that the minimum amount of jobseeker’s inadequate; that the minimum amount of aid is inadequate, that the maximum jobseeker’s aid is inadequate; that the duration of payment of jobseeker’s maximum duration of payment of allowance is too short and that the jobseeker’s allowance is too short; and that minimum amount of rehabilitation and the minimum amount of rehabilitation and invalidity benefits, in certain cases, is invalidity benefits, in certain cases, is inadequate. The Committee also concluded inadequate. Furthermore, the Committee that in Hungary is not in conformity with also concluded that Hungary is not in the European Social Charter on the ground conformity with the European Social that the level of social assistance paid to a Charter on the grounds that the level of single person without resources, including social assistance paid to a single person elderly persons, is not adequate, on the without resources, including elderly ground that equal access to social services persons, is not adequate; that equal access is not guaranteed for lawfully resident to social services is not guaranteed for nationals of all States Parties and on the lawfully resident nationals of all States grounds that it has not been established Parties; and that it has not been established that there is an adequate supply of housing that there is an adequate supply of housing for vulnerable families. for vulnerable families.

Or. en

AM\1157114EN.docx 155/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Amendment 250 Josef Weidenholzer, Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Birgit Sippel, Sylvie Guillaume, Soraya Post

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58a) The UN Committee on the Rights of Children’s report on ‘Concluding observations on the combined third, fourth and fifth periodic reports of Hungary’, published in 14 October 2014, voiced concerns over an increasing number of cases where children are being taken away from their family based on poor socio economic condition. Parents may lose their child due to unemployment, lack of social housing and lack of space in temporary housing institutions. Based on a study by European Roma Right Centre, this practice disproportionately affects Roma families and children.

Or. en

Amendment 251 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58a) In accordance with the Treaties, social and employment policies are strictly of Member States’ competence. Regarding the social rights mentioned in the draft report, specific EU standards were adopted only in the areas of workplace health and safety. Due to their falling into Member States’ competence, social rights

PE622.146v02-00 156/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

show significant divergence based on economic development and other societal factors and therefore can hardly be interpreted and measured within the framework of Article 2 of TEU.

Or. en

Amendment 252 Josef Weidenholzer, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58 b (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58b) Hungary is not in compliance with the European Social Charter on the grounds that Hungary fails to protect its citizens against extreme poverty. Hungary’s workfare program pays less to citizens than the statutory minimum wage. The program creates dependencies and undermines democracy and the rule of law.

Or. en

Amendment 253 Josef Weidenholzer, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Soraya Post

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58 c (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58c) This winter, 149 people froze to death in Hungary by mid-February. This was reported by the Internet portal “24.hu” on Tuesday, citing the Hungarian Social Forum (MSZF), a network of independent aid organisations.

AM\1157114EN.docx 157/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

47 percent of the victims are people living in poverty and frozen to death in their unheated homes, the report said. The others died of frostbite they had suffered outdoors.

Or. en

Amendment 254 Josef Weidenholzer, Miltiadis Kyrkos, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Péter Niedermüller, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58 d (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58d) whereas Hungary signed the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention)in 2014, but has not yet ratified it. Calls on the Hungarian government to ratify the Istanbul Convention as soon as possible.

Or. en

Amendment 255 Josef Weidenholzer, Tanja Fajon, Dietmar Köster, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, Monika Beňová, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Péter Niedermüller, Christine Revault d'Allonnes Bonnefoy, Birgit Sippel, Soraya Post, Sylvie Guillaume

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 58 e (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(58e) Recognises the efforts taken in the anti-human trafficking laws and encourages the government to continue and improve the services of victim support by strengthening victim- and women rights organisations.

PE622.146v02-00 158/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

Or. en

Amendment 256 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 59

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(59) In its Recommendation of 11 July deleted 2017 on the 2017 National Reform Programme of Hungary and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Convergence Programme of Hungary, the Council indicated that the adequacy and coverage of social assistance and unemployment benefits is limited, that the duration of unemployment benefits is still the lowest in the Union at 3 months, below the average time required by jobseekers to find employment, and that the 2015 social assistance reform streamlined the benefits system but does not seem to have guaranteed a uniform and minimally adequate living standard for those in need.

Or. en

Amendment 257 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 59

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(59) In its Recommendation of 11 July (59) In its Recommendation of 11 July 2017 on the 2017 National Reform 2017 on the 2017 National Reform Programme of Hungary and delivering a Programme of Hungary and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Convergence Council opinion on the 2017 Convergence Programme of Hungary, the Council Programme of Hungary, the Council indicated that the adequacy and coverage indicated that the adequacy and coverage of social assistance and unemployment of social assistance and unemployment

AM\1157114EN.docx 159/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

benefits is limited, that the duration of benefits is limited, that the duration of unemployment benefits is still the lowest in unemployment benefits is still the lowest in the Union at 3 months, below the average the Union at 3 months, below the average time required by jobseekers to find time required by jobseekers to find employment, and that the 2015 social employment, and that the 2015 social assistance reform streamlined the benefits assistance reform streamlined the benefits system but does not seem to have system but does not seem to have guaranteed a uniform and minimally guaranteed a uniform and minimally adequate living standard for those in need. adequate living standard for those in need. In reality however, the relevant services of the Hungarian system guarantee a minimal income for people in their active years and the 2015 reform lead to a more transparent welfare system and granted municipalities the right to create a system of provisions which better corresponds to local needs; they can determine the types and checklists for the services under their jurisdiction, and so they can regulate further forms of care tailored to the need of the local population. However, competences not conferred upon the Union in the Treaties remain with the Member States. This issue clearly falls under the national competence of Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 258 Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 59 a (new)

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(59a) Acknowledges the commitment of the Hungarian Government to establish a ‘workfare society’ and achieving the fourth lowest unemployment rate in the EU with 3.8%; further acknowledges the crucial acts Hungary has implemented in order to diminish the trap-like effect of the dependence on welfare in the disadvantaged areas of the country, for example the public employment program

PE622.146v02-00 160/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN

which plays a significant role also in social policy and the European Commission has recognised the substantial steps that have been taken to encourage a transition to the primary labour market from public employment.

Or. en

Amendment 259 Kinga Gál, Traian Ungureanu

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 61

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(61) For those reasons, it should be (61) For those reasons, it should be determined, in accordance with Article determined that the circumstances 7(1) TEU, that there is a clear risk of a presented fall short of proving any clear serious breach by Hungary of the values risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the referred to in Article 2 TEU, values referred to in Article 2 TEU,

Or. en

Amendment 260 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Annex I – point 61

Motion for a resolution Amendment

(61) For those reasons, it should be (61) For those reasons, it should be determined, in accordance with Article determined, in accordance with Article 7(1) TEU, that there is a clear risk of a 7(1) TEU, that there is no clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values serious breach by Hungary of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, referred to in Article 2 TEU,

Or. en

Amendment 261 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

AM\1157114EN.docx 161/162 PE622.146v02-00 EN

Motion for a resolution Article 1 – paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution Amendment

There is a clear risk of a serious breach by There is no clear risk of a serious breach Hungary of the values on which the Union by Hungary of the values on which the is founded. Union is founded.

Or. en

Amendment 262 Kinga Gál, Traian Ungureanu

Motion for a resolution Article 1 – paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution Amendment

There is a clear risk of a serious breach by There is no clear risk of a serious breach Hungary of the values on which the Union by Hungary of the values on which the is founded. Union is founded.

Or. en

Amendment 263 József Szájer, Lívia Járóka, Kinga Gál

Motion for a resolution Article 2 – paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution Amendment

The Council recommends that Hungary deleted take the following actions within three months of the notification of this Decision: [...]

Or. en

PE622.146v02-00 162/162 AM\1157114EN.docx EN