Changes from report parliamentary committee draft to plenary report

Change 9

Removed6. Urges the Council to engage in constructive negotiations with Parliament and the Commission on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, in order to turn these three key EU institutions into role models of transparency and public accountability for the whole of the EU;

Added6. Underlines that public access to documents is a fundamental right of EU citizens and a cornerstone of European democracy; recalls that the technological and societal developments since the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 require its alignment with the new digital context; in this regard, recognises the need to revise this regulation and urges the Council to engage in constructive negotiations with Parliament and the Commission on its revision in order to turn these three key EU institutions into role models of transparency and public accountability for the whole of the EU; strongly believes that any negotiations on the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should be based on the position already adopted by Parliament and that its scope should be extended to all EU institutions, bodies and agencies, thus enhancing the accountability of the decision-making process; recalls, in this context, Parliament’s position that ‘document’ should mean any data content whatever its medium (written on paper or stored in electronic form or as a sound, visual or audiovisual recording) concerning a matter falling within the sphere of responsibility of a Union institution, body, office or agency; stresses that it is essential for the institutions to be transparent in their relations with citizens, as also acknowledged by the Ombudsman in her inquiry on the transparency of Trilogues, in which the Ombudsman understood the particular challenges and sensitivities within the EU system of interinstitutional negotiations but invited the institutions to make efforts to overcome such challenges in order to allow the effective exercise by citizens of their democratic rights;

Change 10

Changed7. Endorses the conclusions of the Ombudsman’s special report to the European Parliament concerning the time the European Commission takes to deal with requests for public access to documents and is worriedconcerned about the Ombudsman’s assessment that these systemic and significant delays in the Commission’s processing of requests for public access to documents amount to maladministration; underlines how important it is that the Commission dedicate more resources to dealing with confirmatory requests under Regulation (EC) No 1049/20011049/2001, as well as the need for more proactive transparency and a more constructive approach to requesters; calls on the Commission to correct this situation as a matter of priority and toby improvereforming its practice of handling confirmatory requests; acknowledges the importancemanagement of the timely treatment ofpublic access to documents requests by all institutions;documents; reminds the Commission of Parliament’s right to bring action against it before the Court of Justice of the European Union on the grounds of infringement of the Treaties(CJEU) and expects a clear and unequivocal commitment by the new College of Commissioners to remedy this situation;

Change 11

Changed8. Takes note of the Ombudsman’s inquiry into the extent to which the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission apply EU law and the decisions of the Court of Justice of the European UnionCJEU when it comes to public access requests for legislative documents, in which the Ombudsman stressed the need to ensure timely public access to legislative documents, as well as to facilitate EU citizens’ participation in the EU law-makinglawmaking process; acknowledges the importance of the timely treatment of access to document requests by all institutions in fostering a sense of trust in the EU legislative process, which is based on the main principles of transparency and public access to information, as confirmed by CJEU case-law; recalls that according to CJEU case-law, EU institutions can only refuse to disclose legislative documents in exceptional circumstances and their reasoning for doing so must be based on specific and tangible facts;

Change 12

Removed9. Is particularly worried that the Ombudsman found maladministration in the Commission’s refusal to provide access to documents concerning the greenhouse gas emissions of the ceramics industry reported under the EU Emissions Trading System; calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to the overriding public interest and to be more mindful of it when assessing the possibility of disclosing documents concerning emissions into the environment;

Added9. Notes the intention of the Ombudsman to conduct a broader inquiry into how the scope of environmental information and information related to emissions into the environment is interpreted by the Commission; is particularly worried that the Ombudsman found maladministration in the Commission’s refusal to provide access to documents concerning the greenhouse gas emissions of the ceramics industry reported under the EU Emissions Trading System; regrets that the Commission rejected the Ombudsman’s proposed solution and failed to ensure the required transparency as well as to give full effect to Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies and to the Aarhus Convention; calls on the Commission to guarantee public access to environmental information, in line with EU law and related CJEU case-law, and to promote public participation in decision-making relating to the environment; is concerned that the Commission’s refusal to provide access to all documents requested concerning the greenhouse gas emissions reported under the EU Emissions Trading System extends to further industrial facilities beyond the ceramics industry and calls on the Ombudsman to continue raising awareness on the findings of the investigations with a view to increasing transparency; recalls that a considerable number of petitions to the European Parliament concern the lack of or limited access to environmental information;

Removed10. Endorses the intention of the Ombudsman to conduct a broader inquiry into how the scope of environmental information and information related to emissions into the environment is interpreted by the Commission; commends the Ombudsman for emphasising that the EU has an obligation to ensure a high level of public access to environmental information and public participation in decision-making relating to the environment;

Added10. Calls on the Council to allow full public access to the legal opinion on Directive (EU) 2022/2041 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on adequate minimum wages in the European Union, as recommended by the Ombudsman, who found evidence of maladministration in this matter;

Change 13

Changed11. CongratulatesSupports the Ombudsman forin her efforts to further contribute to the clarification of what constitutes an EU document and stresses that it is essential that the EU institutions should follow the Ombudsman’s recommendations in order to adapt their administrative practices to take into account evolving means of communication; underlines that citizens’ right to public access to information applies to written physical and electronic documents, as well as to audio and audiovisual recordings related to policies, activities and decisions of the EU institutions, and recalls that work-related text messages and instant messages are considered ‘documents’ under Regulation 1049/2001; regrets the cases where the Commission failed to grant public access to documents in the form of emails or text messages, such as those regarding the draft EU soil, forest and climate-adaptation strategies or exchanges between the Commission President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company in relation to the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines;

Change 14

Changed12. Appreciates the Ombudsman’s commitment to upholding fundamental rights in the EU institutions’ border management activities by launching inquiries into the actions of Frontex and the Commission in thismigration-related area;actions; notes that the Ombudsman asked for further clarification from the Commission as to how it intends to guarantee respect for human rights in the context of the EU-Tunisia Memorandum of Understanding, in an effort to ensure that the EU complies with its human rights obligations; stresses that all EU institutions, bodies and agencies have an obligation to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms as outlined in the Treaties and the Charter;

Change 15

Changed13. WelcomesNotes the Commission’s decision to work with national and local authorities to draw up a fundamental rights impact assessment of EU-funded migration management facilities in Greece,facilities, following ana relevant own-initiative inquiry by the Ombudsman into how the Commission ensuresOmbudsman; respectstresses forthat fundamentallocal rightsresidents inalso thesehave facilities;rights;

Change 16

Changed14. StronglyWelcomes the Ombudsman’s inquiries following the Qatargate scandal in Parliament; strongly supports the Ombudsman’s conclusions that the EU’s ethical and anticorruptionanti-corruption rules need to be respected and strengthened by the EU institutions and that Parliament’s implementation of reforms in this area must be properly monitored and enforced at all levels; urgeshighlights the Ombudsmanneed for Parliament and the Commission always to pay close attention to direct and indirect lobbying practicesactivities in Parliamentorder to identify gaps and weaknesses that mightmay compromise transparency and accountability and increase the risk of potential conflicts of interest; inviteswelcomes the Ombudsman, in this context, tosignificant suggestprogress improvementsmade toon the current Code of Conduct for Members of the European Parliament regarding integrity and transparency;transparency, and encourages the Ombudsman to continue, where appropriate, monitoring the implementation process thereof; underlines that ethics rules have to be rigorously followed in order to strengthen citizens’ confidence in the European institutions;

Change 17

Changed16. WelcomesTakes note of the Ombudsman’s investigations into risks of conflicts of interest in the Commission, especially in the area of the European Defence Fund (EDF);(EDF), findsincluding itthe problematicfact that the Commission is not required to make public the names of the experts it consults on EDF-related projects,projects; andin invitesthis context, points to the Ombudsman’s suggestion that the Commission toshould reflectproactively onpublish howthe todeclarations increaseof transparencyinterest andmade publicby scrutinythe inmembers thisof sensitivethe policyRegulatory area;Scrutiny Board and, if needed, amend the relevant rules governing the Board;

Change 18

Changed17. SupportsTakes note of the Ombudsman’s call on the European Investment Bank (EIB) to improve its rules on conflicts of interest and to strengthen the oversight role of its Ethics and Compliance Committee, following the move of its vice-president to become the CEO of a national promotional bank; encourages the Ombudsman, in this regard, to continue focusing on the issue of cooling-off periods and revolving door moves by senior staff members from all EU institutions, agencies and bodies in order to ensure the highest ethical standards of transparency and public accountability;

Change 19

Changed19. Encourages the Commission to step up its efforts to increase transparency with regard to the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and supports the Ombudsman’s call oninvites the Commission to improve its handling of requests for public access to RRF-related documents and to continue publishing preliminary assessments of Member States’ payment requests;

Change 20

Changed22. PointsRecalls the imperative obligation of the EU institutions to secure the services of independent and well-qualified officials recruited in an open manner and with due geographical balance between nationalities and languages; points out that the Ombudsman conducted an inquiry into how EPSOthe European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) carried out ‘pre-selection’ tests as part of a procedure to recruit new staff into the EU civil service, and identified issues concerning the organisation of tests which are exclusively carried out remotely; calls on EPSO to improve its recruitment procedures by ensuring that technical requirements do not disadvantage certain candidates and to provide clear information to candidates; is of the opinion that candidates should be given the option, if they so choose, to participate in these tests while physically present at a test centre, as was common practice prior to the COVID-19 pandemic;

Change 21

Added25. Stresses that the ‘European Accessibility Act’ was adopted on 17 April 2019 and that the deadline set out in it for its transposition by Member States was 28 June 2022; underlines that the main scope of the European Accessibility Act was to make life easier for at least 87 million persons with disabilities, facilitating their access to, among other things, public transport, banking services, computers, televisions, e-books and online shops; strongly regrets that all Member States are still failing to ensure its full and consistent transposition and keep accumulating delays, as confirmed by the ongoing infringement proceedings launched against all of them by the Commission; calls on the Ombudsman to raise this very serious violation of EU law, which severely undermines the rights of persons with disabilities, as part of the overall activities carried out within the EU framework for the UN CRPD, in order to help resolve it as a matter of priority;

Change 22

Changed26.27. Stresses the importance of the European Network of Ombudsmen (ENO) and the annual meetings hosted with national and regional ombudsmen through the ENO in further raising awareness of what the European Ombudsman can do for European citizens; encourages the Ombudsman to continue to take part in exchanges of experience and best practice with national ombudsmen through the ENO; takes note of the fact that the 2023 ENO annual conference focused on the protection of human rights and addressing the benefits and potential drawbacks of the use of AI in public administration; encourages civil society organisations to better use the services of the European Ombudsman for carrying out scrutiny of the EU institutions, guaranteeing transparency and handling cases of non-compliance with Union law;

Change 23

Changed27.28. Calls for the continuation of the close cooperation between the Ombudsman and the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions, which have the shared mission of bringing the EU institutions closer to citizens; expresses its great appreciation for the attention and follow-up that the Ombudsman affords to all complaints, including thosethe referral of complaints, falling outside theher mandateremit, ofconcerning the European Ombudsman,implementation suchof asEU citizens’legislation complaintsto aboutanother specificrelevant issuesauthority relatedor to EUParliament’s legislation,Committee andon supportsPetitions; encourages the OmbudsmanOmbudsman’s inOffice advisingto thosecontinue complainantsits efforts to turnthat toend, Parliament’sgiven that cooperation with the Committee on Petitions;Petitions, timely information and access to documents in all 24 official EU languages may increase the effective participation of citizens and civil society in the decision-making process;

Change 24

Added29. Appreciates that the acceptance rate for 2023 by the EU institutions, namely the percentage of positive replies to the total number of proposals made by the Ombudsman to correct or improve their administrative practices, stood at 81 %, representing an improvement on the previous year; strongly believes, however, that the Union institutions, agencies, bodies and offices must fully and consistently comply with all of the Ombudsman’s solutions, recommendations and suggestions;

Change 25

Changed29.31. Appreciates and welcomes the efforts of the Ombudsman and her office to constantly improve their internal procedures to ensure that complainants have an optimal experience and that complaints are dealt with as efficiently as possible; encourages the Ombudsman’s efforts to further improve the visibility of her activities and welcomes the improvements to the Ombudsman’s online complaint system, which have made it more user-friendly; welcomes the Ombudsman’s multilingual website, which reflects the Ombudsman’s commitment to offer assistance in the 24 official languages of the EU; emphasises the significance of guaranteeing full access for disabled persons to the whole range of resources provided by the EU to its citizens, especially through systematic translation and interpretation services offered in all official languages, including sign language;