Christian Engström, Pirat

19 mars 2010

What does ”No absolute openness on ACTA” mean?

Filed under: ACTA,English,informationspolitik — Christian Engström @ 15:55

"No absolute openness on ACTA," says Commissioner Neelie Kroes

”No absolute openness on ACTA,” says Commissioner Neelie Kroes in an article in Dutch. If this is indeed the official position of the Commission, it is very alarming.

Article 218 of the Lisbon Treaty (TFEU) says that when it comes to international negotiations,

10. The European Parliament shall be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure.

What part of that sentence does the Commission find hard to understand?

The Commission needs to clarify if it really intends to completely disregard  the resolution adopted by a nearly unanimous Parliament last week.

Together with eight other members of the Green Group in the European Parliament, I have co-signed a written question to the Commission (pdf):

Statements by vice-President Neelie Kroes of the Commission concerning the negotiations on the ACTA agreement

In a Dutch newspaper interview the vice-President of the Commission and Commissioner for the Digital Agenda Neelie Kroes stated that the European Commission should not give response to the demand of Parliament for full transparency and openness concerning the negotiations on the ACTA agreement.

  • Does the Commission concur with the statement, rendered by her vice-President, not to give response to Parliament’s demand of full transparency and openness concerning the negotiations on the ACTA agreement?
  • Does the Commission concur with the view, of her vice-President, that certain information should remain undisclosed for Parliament?
  • Is the Commission aware of the fact that the aforementioned statement de facto implies that the Commission has to set aside its statutory obligation to inform Parliament fully, immediately and at all times, as promulgated in article 218 paragraph 10 TFEU?
  • Is the Commission furthermore aware that the aforementioned statement is in clear contradiction with the joint resolution ”on the transparency and state of play of the ACTA negotiations” adopted almost unanimously by Parliament.
  • Will the Commission issue a statement indicating its stance on transparency and openness relating to its (future) conduct in regard to the negotiations on the ACTA agreement? And if so, will this imply that the earlier differing opinions and statements rendered by her Commissioners should be considered as revoked?

These are very sharp questions, and they are meant to be. It will be very interesting to see what the Commission answers.

…………

Previous articles on ACTA

Andra bloggar om: , , ,

10 kommentarer

  1. To Christian and all the others down in Bryssel.

    Im so glad I voted for you. Keep up the good work and know there are alot of us here in Sweden that watch and are gratefull for your work in EU.

    Kommentar av DanielS — 19 mars 2010 @ 16:07

  2. Nice work!

    Keep going, and don’t let the current ruckus in the party get you down. We need you.

    Kommentar av Anders Troberg — 19 mars 2010 @ 18:41

  3. Keep pushing for this! It’s so exciting to see an MEP taking action on these issues.

    Kommentar av Shii — 19 mars 2010 @ 18:53

  4. come on Christian!! very good work!! I’m an italian guy but I like Piratpartiet!

    Kommentar av Luca — 19 mars 2010 @ 23:36

  5. This is just crazy. How can the Commission do this and still be legit? If they continue with this and ACTA goes final, shouldn’t it be kind of void because of the incorrect way it was negotiated?

    Kommentar av Niklas — 20 mars 2010 @ 14:45

  6. Well Niklas, wouldn’t that be almost a bit more logical seeing it from a perspective that they rather have the whole thing scrapped than the public actually seeing whom and what is going on.

    If the commission wont comply the result is that parliament votes no on the treaty no matter what, if I’m not mistaken that is.

    Based purely on my speculation ofc.

    Kommentar av Lost in brussels. — 20 mars 2010 @ 17:32

  7. Good work Christian! Keep pushing them!

    Kommentar av William — 20 mars 2010 @ 17:55

  8. Vad kul. De ska trolla fram en lag och ingen utomstående ska få veta vad de håller på med förrän våra valda representanter är klara med lagstiftningen? Är det här Kaflas Processen eller vad är det egentligen? Jag vill mena att demokrati finns inte längre – om man bortser från PP dvs.

    Kommentar av Rick — 21 mars 2010 @ 20:49

  9. The most likely answer is that the Commission is bound of the terms of negotiation that were settled before the Lisbon treaty came into force, and is prohibited from disclosing information.

    However, such an answer should not be accepted. The Lisbon treaty did not have any exceptions for this kind of situation, so the Commission has to work within the framework set by the treaty.

    Especially, negotiations should be conducted in the way specified in the treaty. If that’s not possible, the EU should withdraw from any such negotiations.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 22 mars 2010 @ 17:56

  10. @Christian E.

    Keep up the good work, and keep the bunsen burner on the commission’s behind.

    If they refuse to comply with their obligations, can’t they be sacked, censured or hauled before the EU court? Can we bring legal proceedings to the table and show that the people’s elected do have some fundamental rights in this process?

    Grateful to have voted PP. Will do so again come september.

    Kommentar av Scary Devil Monastery — 23 mars 2010 @ 11:14


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Skapa en gratis webbplats eller blogg på WordPress.com.

%d bloggare gillar detta: