GALUTINIS
A6-0084/2005
5.4.2005
***II
REKOMENDACIJA ANTRAJAM SVARSTYMUI
Tarybos bendroji pozicija siekiant priimti Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentą, iš dalies keičiantį Konvenciją dėl 1985 m. birželio 14 d. Šengeno susitarimo dėl laipsniško jų bendrų sienų kontrolės panaikinimo įgyvendinimo dėl valstybių narių tarnybų, atsakingų už transporto priemonių registracijos liudijimų išdavimą, prieigos prie Šengeno informacinės sistemos
(14238/1/2004 – C6‑0007/2005 – 2003/0198(COD))
Piliečių laisvių, teisingumo ir vidaus reikalų komitetas
Pranešėjas:
Carlos Coelho
PE 355.451v01-00
Procedūrų simboliai
* Konsultavimosi procedūra balsavusių narių balsų dauguma
**I Bendradarbiavimo procedūra (pirmasis svarstymas) balsavusių narių balsų dauguma
**II Bendradarbiavimo procedūra (antrasis svarstymas) balsavusių narių balsų dauguma pritariama bendrajai pozicijai visų Parlamento narių balsų dauguma atmetama arba iš dalies pakeičiama bendroji pozicija
*** Pritarimo procedūra visų Parlamento narių balsų dauguma, išskyrus EB sutarties 105, 107, 161 ir 300 straipsniuose bei ES sutarties 7 straipsnyje numatytus atvejus
***I Bendro sprendimo procedūra (pirmasis svarstymas) balsavusių narių balsų dauguma
***II Bendro sprendimo procedūra (antrasis svarstymas) balsavusių narių balsų dauguma pritariama bendrajai pozicijai visų Parlamento narių balsų dauguma atmetama arba iš dalies pakeičiama bendroji pozicija
***III Bendro sprendimo procedūra (trečiasis svarstymas) balsavusių narių balsų dauguma pritariama bendram tekstui
(Procedūra pasirenkama atsižvelgiant į Komisijos pasiūlytą teisinį pagrindą)
Teisės akto projekto pakeitimai
Parlamento pataisytas tekstas yra paryškinamas pusjuodžiu
kursyvu. Paryškinimas paprastu kursyvu atitinkamiems techniniams
skyriams nurodo tas teisės akto projekto vietas, kurias siūloma taisyti
rengiant galutinį tekstą (pvz., tekste tam tikra kalba paliktas akivaizdžias klaidas ar praleistas vietas). Šiems siūlomiems taisymams atlikti reikalingas atitinkamų skyrių sutikimas.
TURINYS
EUROPOS PARLAMENTO TEISINĖS REZOLIUCIJOS PROJEKTAS..................................5
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT................................................................................................8
PROCEDŪRA...........................................................................................................................11
EUROPOS PARLAMENTO TEISINĖS REZOLIUCIJOS PROJEKTAS
dėl Tarybos bendrosios pozicijos siekiant priimti Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentą, iš dalies keičiantį Konvenciją dėl 1985 m. birželio 14 d. Šengeno susitarimo dėl laipsniško jų bendrų sienų kontrolės panaikinimo įgyvendinimo dėl valstybių narių tarnybų, atsakingų už transporto priemonių registracijos liudijimų išdavimą, prieigos prie Šengeno informacinės sistemos
(14238/1/2004 – C6‑0007/2005 – 2003/0198(COD) )
(Bendro sprendimo procedūra: antrasis svarstymas)
Europos Parlamentas ,
– atsižvelgdamas į Tarybos bendrąją poziciją (14238/1/2004 – C6‑0007/2005 ),
– atsižvelgdamas į savo poziciją dėl Komisijos pasiūlymo Parlamentui ir Tarybai ( KOM(2003)0510 )
Dar nepaskelbta OL. per pirmąjį svarstymą
Patvirtintas tekstas, 2004 4 1, P5_TA(2004)0266 . ,
– atsižvelgdamas į EB sutarties 251 straipsnio 2 dalį,
– atsižvelgdamas į Darbo tvarkos taisyklių 62 straipsnį,
– atsižvelgdamas į Piliečių laisvių, teisingumo ir vidaus reikalų komiteto rekomendaciją antrajam svarstymui ( A6‑0084/2005 ),
1. tvirtina iš dalies pakeistą bendrąją poziciją;
2. paveda Pirmininkui pateikti poziciją Tarybai ir Komisijai.
Tarybos bendroji pozicija
Parlamento pakeitimai
Pakeitimas
1
3 konstatuojamoji dalis
(3) Nyderlandų Karalystės iniciatyva, kuria siekiama priimti Tarybos sprendimą dėl kovos su tarpvalstybinio pobūdžio nusikaltimais, susijusiais su transporto priemonėmis
OL C 34, 2004 2 7, p. 18. , apima SIS naudojimą, kaip kovai su nusikaltimais, susijusiais su transporto priemonėmis, skirtos teisėsaugos strategijos sudėtinę dalį.
(3) 2004 m. gruodžio 22 d. Tarybos sprendimas 2004/919/EB dėl kovos su tarpvalstybinio pobūdžio nusikaltimais, susijusiais su transporto priemonėmis
OL C 34, 2004 2 7, p. 18. , apima SIS naudojimą, kaip kovai su nusikaltimais, susijusiais su transporto priemonėmis, skirtos teisėsaugos strategijos sudėtinę dalį.
_______________
1 OL C 34, 2004 2 7, p. 18.
______________________
1 OL L 389, 2004 12 30, p. 28.
Justification
Since the initiative was in the meantime adopted, the text of the recital needs to be adjusted.
Pakeitimas
2
13a konstatuojamoji dalis (nauja)
(13a) Šveicarijos atžvilgiu šiuo reglamentu plėtojamos Šengeno acquis nuostatos, kaip apibūdinta Europos Sąjungos, Europos Bendrijos ir Šveicarijos Konfederacijos sudarytame susitarime dėl Šveicarijos Konfederacijos asociacijos įgyvendinant, taikant ir plėtojant Šengeno acquis 1 , kurios priklauso Sprendimo 1999/437/EB2 1 straipsnio G punkte nurodomai sričiai, skaitant kartu su Tarybos sprendimo 2004/860/EB dėl šio susitarimo pasirašymo Europos Bendrijos vardu ir tam tikrų nuostatų laikino taikymo 4 straipsnio 1 dalyje nurodytai sričiai.
_______________________.
1 Tarybos dokumentą 13054/04 galima rasti adresu
http://register.consilium.eu.int .
2 OL L 176, 1999 7 10, p. 31.
3 OL L 368, 2004 12 15, p. 26 ir OL L 370, 2004 12 17, p. 78.
Justification
Since the Agreement with Switzerland was signed on 26 October, any legislative act that constitutes a development of the Schengen Acquis as regards the purposes served by the Agreement should be identified as such in a separate recital. Since this Regulation is a development of the Schengen Acquis, it requires a recital concerning Switzerland.
Pakeitimas
3
1 straipsnis
102a straipsnio 3a dalis (nauja) (1990 Šengeno Konvencija)
3a. Kiekvienais metais Taryba, paprašiusi bendros priežiūros institucijos, įsteigtos pagal duomenų apsaugos taisyklių skyriaus 115 straipsnio nuostatas, nuomonės, pateikia ataskaitą Europos Parlamentui dėl šio straipsnio įgyvendinimo. Šioje ataskaitoje pateikiama informacija ir statistikos duomenys apie šio straipsnio naudą ir įgyvendinimo rezultatus, be to, nurodoma, kaip taikomos duomenų apsaugos taisyklės.
Justification
To receive a report about the implementation of this Article is very important for Parliament. The original amendment 10, which was not included by Council in its common position, is therefore tabled again. It is, however, modified in two aspects: first, because the Commission has no responsibility for the management of SIS 1+, it is proposed that the Council itself sends this report. Second, to save the Member States the job of making technical changes, the number of searches and the number of stolen vehicles is replaced by the more general words "information and statistics relating to the use and results of the implementation of this Article".
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
I. Background
In view of increase in the number of vehicles which are being stolen and illegally traded
Statistics provided by Europol reveal that in 2002 1.149.114 vehicles were stolen of which only 388.779 could be recovered. , further action to combat crime of this nature must be taken as a matter of urgency. In a Europe within which checks at internal borders have been abolished, a response must be found which involves clear action at Community level. One course of action discussed in this context is the access to the Schengen Information System (SIS) for vehicle registration authorities.
Following the request of Council and intensive debates the Commission in 2003 made such a proposal to give public vehicle registration authorities direct access to some data in the SIS (COM(2003)510). This should allow them to better check whether vehicles presented to them for registration have been stolen. Should a vehicle registration authority be a private entity then the access should be indirect, i.e. an access via a public authority.
On 1st April 2004 the European Parliament adopted its first reading (T5-0266/2004)
Not yet published in OJ. based on the rapporteur's previous report ( A5-0205/2004 ). At its first reading, Parliament on the one hand limited the data to which vehicle registration authorities should have access by withdrawing access to data relating to blank official documents and to data concerning issued identity papers. On the other hand, Parliament suggested including in the SIS (and subsequently giving vehicle registration authorities access to) data concerning vehicle registration certificates and vehicle number plates which have been stolen, misappropriated or lost. In addition, it emphasised that clearer information should be given as to which bodies are entitled to have access, and for what purpose. Furthermore, Parliament requested a yearly report on the implementation of this measure. Finally, to underline that increased access should only be possible with strengthened data protection rules it introduced the requirement to record every transmission.
II. Council's common position
On 22 December 2004 Council adopted its common position (14238/1/04) accompanied by the statement of the Council's reasons (14238/1/04 REV 1 ADD 1). Pursuant to Article 251.2 TEC the European Commission informed that it supports the common position (COM(2005)3).
The Council essentially followed Parliament's first reading. It agreed to modify the data to which vehicle registration authorities should have access, as outlined above. Overall, Council accepted 7 out of 10 amendments from Parliament.
III. Recommendation of the rapporteur
The rapporteur welcomes the common position of Council and is pleased that the Council followed Parliament's first reading to such a large extent. He is confident that the legal act can soon be finally adopted, in order to allow this useful measure to come into force.
For a general appreciation of the Commission's proposal the rapporteur refers to his report A5-0205/2004 .
Since most of Parliament's amendments were accepted by Council there are very few outstanding issues for the second reading.
As regards Amendment 4 as contained in the report A5-0205/2004 and adopted by Parliament, which was not included by Council, the rapporteur has dropped it, since on 24 February 2005 the Council finally adopted the initiative by the Kingdom of Spain with a view to adopting a Council Decision concerning the introduction of some new functions for the Schengen Information System, in particular in the fight against terrorism. This decision provides for a change to Article 100 f) of the Schengen Implementing Convention by including data on "vehicle registration certificates and vehicle number plates which have been stolen, misappropriated, lost or invalidated;". This change covers the original Amendment 4.
As regards Amendment 11 as contained in the report A5-0205/2004 and adopted by Parliament, which was not included by Council, the rapporteur has dropped it too, since its paragraphs 1 and 3 are also contained in the Decision mentioned above. Paragraph 2 of the amendment 11 is, however, not included. This paragraph proposed recording the person or object on whom the search in the SIS was run, the terminal or user carrying out the search, the place, date and time of the search and the reasons for the search. It was an attempt to change the data-protection rules for the SIS in general and the rapporteur can accept that it was, for the moment, not included in the revised text of the Schengen Implementing Convention. Since the proposal for the SIS II is forthcoming, this issue can be dealt with in the context of this legal instrument.
The rapporteur does, however, insist on Amendment 10. This amendment requests an annual report about the implementation of the proposed access to vehicle registration authorities to combat vehicle crime. In this report the Commission shall also "state how many searches were made, how many stolen vehicles were detected and how the data protection rules were applied". Council did not include this amendment by arguing that "the current draft Regulation does not provide the correct and sufficient legal basis for these provisions."
14238/1/04 REV 1 ADD 1, p. 2, point 4. The rapporteur does not agree with this argument because if it would be true then we would never have a report on anything.
Reporting about the SIS is of great importance for Parliament. Currently Parliament receives no report on the SIS. Only the table of hits and the report of the Joint Supervisory Authority are available. With these documents alone it is not possible for Parliament to make an assessment of the system. Only with more detailed reports which include a qualitative and quantitative assessment can Parliament exercise its legislative function. The legislator needs to know whether a law achieves its objectives or not. Reporting is also important for Parliament's role as one arm of the budgetary authority, since the SIS central unit is paid for out of the European budget. The rapporteur therefore proposes that Amendment 10 be retained.
Nevertheless, he proposes a slightly different wording, in order to ensure that Member States do not have to change their national systems at this stage before changes will become necessary anyway under SIS II. He also proposes that the report should be sent by the Council because the Commission has no responsibility for the management of the current system (SIS 1+).
In addition to this amendment the rapporteur proposes two further amendments which are of a technical nature. One amendment is introduced to take account of Switzerland's forthcoming association with the Schengen acquis on which this measure constitutes a development. A second amendment updates the text in order to take account of the fact that the Dutch initiative to which Parliament referred in its Amendment 1 and the Council in recital 3 has in the meantime been adopted.
Council Decision (2004/920/EC) of 22 December 2004 on tackling vehicle crime with cross-border implications , in OJ L 389 of 30.12.2004, p. 28.
IV. The second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)
Since the amendments contained in this proposal will be included in the proposal on the new SIS II, the rapporteur considers that some of Parliament's requests should be restated: first of all, the SIS II proposal should be based on a legal basis providing for the codecision procedure, as is the case with the proposal on the Visa Information System. Nothing else would be appropriate in the changed context. This forthcoming procedure would then also be the occasion to deal with the outstanding issues of this report, notably reporting and the data- protection rules in general.
In this context the rapporteur also expresses his concern about the declaration Austria and Germany made for the minutes. This declaration states that the two Member States are of the opinion that this legal act should have had its legal basis in the third pillar.
Furthermore, the rapporteur would like to point out that Parliament will look very carefully at each proposal to give access to the SIS to new authorities.
European Parliament recommendation to the Council on the second-generation Schengen information system (SIS II) ( 2003/2180(INI) ) adopted on 20.11.2003. As already outlined in report A5-0205/2004 , several proposals are being discussed which also relate to private entities. Private entities should under no circumstances be granted direct access to the SIS. It should also be borne in mind that the security risk increases as increasing numbers of people have access to what is very sensitive information.
Finally, the rapporteur also repeats his wish to receive in the future more reassurance that the data-protection rules laid down in the Schengen convention and in Directive 95/46 are effectively respected and controlled. Data-protection authorities need sufficient resources to fulfil their task and Member States have to be firmly committed to defending the fundamental right of data protection.
PROCEDŪRA
Pavadinimas
Tarybos bendroji pozicija siekiant priimti Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentą, iš dalies keičiantį Konvenciją dėl 1985 m. birželio 14 d. Šengeno susitarimo dėl laipsniško jų bendrų sienų kontrolės panaikinimo įgyvendinimo dėl valstybių narių tarnybų, atsakingų už transporto priemonių registracijos liudijimų išdavimą, prieigos prie Šengeno informacinės sistemos
Nuorodos
14238/1/2004 – C6-0007/2005 – 2003/0198(COD)
Teisinis pagrindas
EB 251 straipsnio 2 dalis ir 71 straipsnio 1dalies d punktas
Pagrindas Darbo tvarkos taisyklėse
62 straipsnis
Parlamento pirmojo svarstymo data - P5
1.04.2004
P5_TA(2004)0266
Komisijos pasiūlymas
KOM(2003)0510 – C5-0412/2003
Komisijos pasiūlymas su pakeitimais
Bendrosios pozicijos paskelbimo data plenarinio posėdžio metu
13.01.2005
Atsakingas komitetas
Paskelbimo per plenarinį posėdį data
LIBE 13.1.2005
Pranešėjas(-ai)
Paskyrimo data
Carlos Coelho 19.01.2005
Pakeistas(-i) pranešėjas(-ai)
Svarstymas komitete
1.02.2005
16.03.2005
31.03.2005
Priėmimo data
31.03.2005
Galutinio balsavimo rezultatai
Už:
Prieš:
Susilaikė:
19
5
9
Posėdyje per galutinį balsavimą dalyvavę nariai
Edit Bauer, Johannes Blokland, Mihael Brejc, Kathalijne Maria Buitenweg, Michael Cashman, Giusto Catania, Jean-Marie Cavada, Carlos Coelho, Agustín Díaz de Mera García Consuegra, Rosa Díez González, Antoine Duquesne, Patrick Gaubert, Elly de Groen-Kouwenhoven, Adeline Hazan, Lívia Járóka, Ewa Klamt, Magda Kósáné Kovács, Ole Krarup, Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler, Stavros Lambrinidis, Romano Maria La Russa, Sarah Ludford, Jaime Mayor Oreja, Hartmut Nassauer, Martine Roure, Inger Segelström, Ioannis Varvitsiotis, Manfred Weber, Tatjana Ždanoka.
Posėdyje per galutinį balsavimą dalyvavę pavaduojantys nariai
Gérard Deprez, Camiel Eurlings, Giovanni Claudio Fava, Ignasi Guardans Cambó, Panayiotis Demetriou, Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, Sophia in 't Veld, Vincent Peillon, Marie-Line Reynaud, Bogusław Sonik, Jan Zahradil.
Posėdyje per galutinį balsavimą dalyvavę pavaduojantys nariai (178 straipsnio 2 dalis)
Pateikimo data – A6
5.04.2005
A6-0084/2005
Pastabos
