Ilhan KYUCHYUK

Policy topics Ilhan KYUCHYUK is active on

What Ilhan KYUCHYUK has said (66)

• 2026-03-11 “Answer given by Ms Zaharieva on behalf of the European Commission 8.6.2026 Written question The Commission ensures inclusion of appropriate multidisciplinary expertise in the evaluation of proposals under programmes such as the European Innovation Council (EIC) by appointing independent external experts covering the relevant scientific, technological and socioeconomic domains, including education, psychology and neurodevelopmental needs where relevant. Experts are selected from dedicated pools, trained and monitored to ensure compliance with rules and avoidance of bias. Panels are composed to ensure diversity and expertise aligned with the proposal content. Evaluation criteria are defined in the annual EIC work programme and include assessment of societal and ethical aspects, including for AI-based solutions, under the impact criterion. This covers potential benefits, risks and compliance with ethical standards. Transparency and consistency are ensured through standardised procedures like calibration of experts, quality checks and evaluation committees which review and finalise scores. Originality, intellectual property strategy and global market potential are assessed using the award criteria defined in the EIC work programme; this includes novelty, breakthrough nature, market development and scalability. Targeted calls and strategic monitoring of global trends contribute to reducing dependencies and strengthening the EU’s position in strategic AI technologies. Central to the Commission’s strategy is also the Resource for AI Science in Europe (RAISE) [1] and the European Frontier AI Initiative [2] , which seek to pool resources and talent to bolster the EU's AI ecosystem through three key pillars: strategic research and innovation, expert consultation and support for the development of highly capable European AI models. [1] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/strategy-research-and-innovation/our-digital-future/european-ai-science-strategy/raise-resource-ai-science-europe_en. [2] https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/funding/turning-strategy-action-commission-launches-frontier-ai-grand-challenge.”
  Research priorities within the EU
• 2025-07-16 “E-002905/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission From the EU budget for the period 2021-2027 (EUR 2.018 trillion 1 ), at least 30% must be spent on fighting climate change, including by supporting the energy transition. In 2022 the Commission mobilised around EUR 300 billion to fund the REPowerEU action plan. Bulgaria benefits from EUR 6.17 billion from the Recovery and Resilience Facility, of which EUR 3 billion contribute to supporting the green transition, mostly supporting energy efficiency, renewable energy and electricity storage 2 . Further EUR 1.8 billion from the Bulgarian cohesion policy funding are supporting the energy transition. The proposal to modernise cohesion policy in the context of the mid-term review will provide an opportunity to Bulgaria to further invest in accelerating its energy transition 3 . The Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Facility (AFIF) is a funding instrument to support the rollout of alternative fuels infrastructure 4 . In addition, funding for energy infrastructure, energy efficiency, clean energy (including alternative fuels) is available also under other EU funding instruments 5 . The Technical Support Instrument supports Member States design and implement reforms, and for 2026 a key focus area is the implementation of country-specific recommendations, which, for Bulgaria, specifically recommend reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Energy will be well covered also in the next Multi-Annual Financial Framework (MFF) 6 . There are also other initiatives meant to support Member States reduce their dependence on imported fossil fuels and increase energy sustainability, such as the Affordable Energy Action Plan 7 , the REPowerEU roadmap 8 , and the legislative proposal aimed to gradually phase out 1 In current prices, including the NextGenerationEU component. 2 Relevant measures support energy efficiency (renovation of at least 2.15 million square meter in residential buildings and at least 524 non-residential buildings leading to savings of 30% in primary energy demand), solar systems for domestic hot water supply and photovoltaic systems of up to 10 kilowatt-peak for at least 1500 households, grid-scale electricity storage facilities with 3000 megawatt-hour of usable energy capacity. Additional support is provided for sustainable transport, with a focus on electric mobility. 3 It includes a new specific objective on energy transition, covering energy interconnectors, related supportive infrastructure and protection of critical energy infrastructure. A political agreement was reached between the colegislators on 15 July 2025 on this proposal. 4 Managed under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) for Transport, it has proven efficient, predictable, and aligned with the objectives set in the new Regulation for the deployment of alternative fuels infrastructure (AFIR) (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1804/oj) regarding publicly accessible electric recharging pools and hydrogen refuelling stations across the EU's main transport corridors and hubs, as well as the objectives set in the ReFuelEU aviation (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R2405&qid=1699634788830) and the FuelEU maritime (https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R1805) Regulations. 5 E.g. CEF-Energy, the Modernisation Fund, the Innovation Fund, Horizon Europe, InvestEU. 6 E.g., in its proposal for the next MFF, adopted on 16 July 2025, the Commission increased by five times the funding for CEF-Energy (to EUR 30 billion). A new European Competitiveness Fund, worth EUR 451 billion, will support investments in strategic technologies, including EUR 67.4 billion earmarked for the clean transition and industrial decarbonisation, being very relevant also for alternative fuels. 7 Adopted by the Commission on 26 February 2025, including a set of concrete short-term and structural measures aimed to ensure access to affordable energy, to enhance competitiveness, affordability, security and”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources) · Energy transition (state support)
• 2025-07-02 “E-002683/2025 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware that many people in Bulgaria fear that the introduction of the euro will bring with it higher prices. And those fears are further fuelled by disinformation. There are historical examples of all the past changeovers, most recently in 2023 in Croatia. In all those cases, the impact of the changeover on prices was minimal. The three most important steps to limit abusive price increases in the changeover period include the dual display of prices, which will start on 8 August 2025, following the Council decision of 8 July 2025 on the introduction of the euro in Bulgaria for 1 January 2026, and will end only on 31 December 2026, thereby giving ample time to compare prices in both currencies. The other two elements are the monitoring and control performed by consumer protection and competition authorities to ensure businesses do not engage in abusive price rises during the changeover and a clear and widespread communication campaign that reaches all citizens. Those measures have proven successful in the past. The Commission as well as the European Central Bank have already provided technical support in the practical arrangements of the changeover. Furthermore, the Commission has worked closely with the national authorities in developing the communication campaign to be implemented. As in previous cases, the Commission is also planning to cofinance this campaign and stands ready to provide further technical assistance in case this is requested by the national authorities.”
  Cash as means of payment
• 2025-05-14 “E-001938/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has been continuously engaging with the Cambodian authorities and relevant stakeholders, including the European Parliament on the issues of concern regarding human rights situation in Cambodia. The Commission took note and is giving due consideration to the European Parliament Resolution of 28 November 2024 on the shrinking space for civil society in Cambodia 1 . As stressed by the Commission during the European Parliament debate accompanying the Resolution, the EU is closely monitoring the situation of civil society organisations affected by the actions of the authorities. In the recent meeting between the President of the European Council and the Prime Minister of Cambodia, held in the margins of the Third United Nations Ocean Conference in Nice on 9 June 2025, the EU voiced its hope for respect of human rights and greater freedom for civil society and independent media in Cambodia. The EU will also continue to support human rights and democracy in Cambodia through its cooperation instruments. Regarding the Everything but Arms (EBA) trade scheme 2 , the EU’s current focus is on the implementation of the decision taken in 2020 to partially withdraw EBA preferences 3 . Since the withdrawal, the interaction with Cambodia continued in the context of the political dialogue with the European External Action Service. On 21 November 2023, the Commission and the High Representative/Vice-President published a Report on EU Enhanced Engagement with Cambodia 4 , which contains a public assessment of the developments in Cambodia in the areas of concern. Regarding the case of Mr Lim Kimya, the respective EU Delegations in Bangkok and Phnom Penh have been following the developments on this file. It is to be noted that the case falls under the remit of the competent French authorities who are actively pursuing judicial cooperation with Thai and Cambodian authorities. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/291917/TA-10-2024-0053_EN.pdf. 2 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/content/everything-arms-eba. 3 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/550 of 12 February 2020, OJ L127, 22.4.2020, p.1-12. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=SWD(2023)360&lang=en.”
  EU-Cambodia relations
• 2025-04-28 “E-001694/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is aware of the situation concerning the Rudozem–Xanthi Road section, which forms part of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T) comprehensive network and has addressed the situation with Greece. The timely development of this infrastructure is important for improving cross-border connectivity and is relevant in the context of the Schengen Borders Code. The Commission underlines the responsibility of the Member States concerned to ensure that infrastructure projects are delivered in line with their commitments under the TEN-T Regulation 1 , which foresees the completion of the comprehensive network by 2050. 2. Delays in making this cross-border section operational may affect progress towards key policy goals, including the reduction of transport pressure on other corridors and improvements in road safety. While the Commission has not carried out a specific assessment of the economic or social impacts of this particular delay, well-functioning transport links are known to contribute to both regional development and the objectives of the EU's Vision Zero strategy 2 , which aims to eliminate road deaths by 2050. 3. The Commission encourages the competent national authorities to take the necessary steps to address the outstanding issues and ensure that this section of the TEN-T network becomes fully operational. Continued dialogue and coordination between the Member States concerned remain essential to achieve proper cross-border connectivity in line with the broader objectives of the TEN-T policy. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1679/oj/eng. 2 https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/document/download/1c3740d6-a8bf-4be8-b4b2ad6324299dfe_en?filename=H2020%20Transport-Road%20Safety%202022-web.pdf.”
  EU transport infrastructure integration · EU funding for transportation
• 2025-03-14 “E-001113/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission Civil society organisations (CSOs) play a key role in upholding fundamental rights, democracy and the Rule of Law. The Commission is committed to defending the core values which the EU is founded upon, and to ensuring a safe and enabling environment for civil society can freely defend and uphold these core values in their day-to-day work. To carry out their functions, CSOs must be protected, supported and empowered. The Commission has a dedicated policy work strand on a thriving civic space 1 , which includes the 2023 Recommendation to Member States on civic engagement 2 . Under the Citizen Equality Rights and Values programme 3 , it has also supported almost 1 500 CSOs in all 27 Member States. During its current mandate, the Commission will further step up its engagement with civil society, which will include the development of an EU Civil Society Strategy and further engagement with civil society through a Civil Society Platform. The Commission also monitors significant developments concerning the situation of civic space in the context of its annual Rule of Law Report. The 2024 chapter on Greece reports that concerns regarding the space for civil society remain. It also refers to the Bekir-Ousta and Others group of cases 4 decided by the European Court of Human Rights, which have been pending implementation for more than 15 years. The Commission will continue to monitor developments in this area and will provide an up-to-date assessment in its 2025 Rule of Law Report. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-fundamental-rights-eu/eucharter-fundamental-rights/application-charter/thriving-civic-space-protect-fundamental-rights_en?prefLang=es. 2 Commission Recommendation (EU) 2023/2836 of 12 December 2023 on promoting the engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil society organisations in public policy-making processes, C/2023/8627. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/programmes/cerv. 4 https://hudoc.exec.coe.int/eng#{%22execidentifier%22:[%22004-15567%22]}.”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe · EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• 2025-02-06 “E-000562/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the difficulties encountered by investigative media. The Commission is currently collecting information to better estimate the impact on media organisations within the EU of the decision referred to by the Honourable Member. Investigative media based on the EU and other eligible countries can receive financing from the Creative Europe programme 1 , notably via the ‘Journalism Partnerships’ action. This action has already allowed to finance dozens of investigative and other media in the recent years, including in areas with most issues of media pluralism. A new call for proposals 2 to support media of special relevance to democracy, including investigative journalism, is under evaluation. Beyond this, and as stated in the Political Guidelines for 2024−2029 3 , the Commission is committed to supporting and protecting independent media and journalists. It will continue funding projects through different instruments, such as established programmes (Creative Europe, Multimedia Actions 4 ) or pilot projects and preparatory actions 5 , to promote a free, diverse and pluralistic media environment and/or address structural challenges of media sectors. 1 https://culture.ec.europa.eu/creative-europe/about-the-creative-europe-programme 2 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/funding/call-proposals-journalism-partnerships-collaborations-2025 3 https://commission.europa.eu/document/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en 4 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/multimedia-actions 5 For example, one call for proposals which closed on 15 March focused on Russian and Belarusian media established and working in the EU. More here: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/funding/media-freedomhub-2025”
  EU support for traditional (non-digital) media · Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2025-02-05 “E-000507/2025 Answer given by Ms Albuquerque on behalf of the European Commission The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) issued Recommendation EIOPA-BOS-24-521 1 to the Financial Supervision Commission (FSC), the Bulgarian national supervisory authority, in accordance with Article 16(1) of the EIOPA Regulation 2 . This recommendation was adopted by the Board of Supervisors (BoS), which, as per Article 40 of the EIOPA Regulation, includes the heads of national public authorities responsible for the supervision of financial institutions in each Member State, including the FSC and the Romanian Financial Supervisory Authority (ASF). The Commission is a non-voting member of the BoS and was not involved in the adoption of the recommendation. In addition, the recommendation does not mention any specific insurance undertaking. Under the current EU supervisory framework, national supervisory authorities retain primary responsibility for the prudential supervision of insurance undertakings with head offices within their jurisdiction, ensuring compliance with Solvency II 3 . These authorities operate independently in line with their mandates. 1 https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/document/download/451793ef-5ec0-433a-88828ea03d7fc8ed_en?filename=EIOPA%20Recommendation%20to%20the%20FSC_EN.pdf 2 Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/79/EC, OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48–83. 3 Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance, OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1–155.”
  Financial regulation
• 2024-08-26 “P-001548/2024 Answer given by Mr Reynders on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is following the situation in Bulgaria and is in a constant dialogue with the Bulgarian authorities to promote the rule of law within the framework of the comprehensive annual rule of law cycle. The 2024 Rule of Law Report, published on 24 July 2024, presents developments and recommendations related to the rule of law in the Member States of the EU and includes a dedicated country chapter on all 27 Member States, including Bulgaria 1 . In the particular case of Bulgaria, the 2024 report notes that concerns have been raised as to the functioning and independence of certain regulatory and independent authorities in the country. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/2024-rule-law-report-communication-and-country-chapters_en”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law · Rule of law and democracy in the EU (political compass)
• 2024-07-30 “P-001453/2024 Answer given by Mr Schmit on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recalls that EU law in the field of social security coordination provides only for the coordination of the Member States' national social security systems. Each Member State is free to determine the details of its own social security system and can decide how its unemployment benefit should be calculated. However, if the calculation of the unemployment benefit is to be based on the amount of the previous salary, the Member State shall take into account exclusively the salary received by the unemployed person in respect of the last activity of work in the territory of that State 1 . And if a reference period is used for determining the salary to be used, periods of work in other Member States during the reference period must be taken into account 2 . The requirement to take into account exclusively the salary relating to the last activity of work in the competent State applies also to the periods of work in the other States. 1. The requirement of the draft amendment appears to concern primarily the calculation of benefits and is not in conflict with the principle of the aggregation or the general spirit of the rules under Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 3 . 2. Provided that exclusively the salary from the last activity of work is used also to the periods of work in other Member States during the reference period for persons who were not frontier workers, the Bulgarian draft amendment is in line with Article 62 of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004. This calculation respects the principle of equal treatment as defined in Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EC) 883/2004. 1 Article 62(1) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004. 2 Article 62(2) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004. Frontier workers have specific rules, cfr. Article 62(3). 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/883/oj”
  EU competences on social policies · EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers
• “On the establishment of the Justice Programme on the Service of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents on the EU Codex System, among others, are all aiming at promoting the case of IT systems and electronic means to facilitate access to justice and the administrative and administration of justice. Comparable levels of digitalisation of justice in the member states have an impact on cross-border litigation and cross-border judicial Cooperation in the latest edition of the EU Justice Scoreboard. The indicators show that there are differences between our Member States as regards the digitalisation of justice systems. The indicators are different and considerably different at the Commission considers there. There is a potential for improvement. Our ICM today aims to discuss the opportunities and challenges in the area of E-justice. As regards civil and commercial matters, I hope it will be a valuable opportunity to exchange views and ideas together on this very fundamental issue. Without further ado, I would like to give the floor to Mr. Nils Berndt, Deputy Director General for Digital Transformation and Justice and consumers. For an introduction on those on this topic for about 15 minutes. We know that you have to leave a bit before 11:00, so you have the floor, please.”
  Jurisdiction conflicts between EU and national courts
• “Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to today's meeting. First item is adoption of the agenda. Can we adopt the agenda? Yes, we can interpret this for the foreign languages are present today. German, English, French, Italian and Spanish. Next item is chairs. Announcements. I don't have any announcements for today. Adoption of the minutes. That is not the case for today's meeting. Verification of credentials. There are none and term of office. We don't have any issues under rule four. And I go immediately to item number six, which is exchange of views with representatives of the European Court of Auditors. It is with great pleasure that I welcome today Mr. Jan Gregor, member of the European Court of Auditors since May 2016 and the Dean of its chamber five on financing and administrating the Union. This exchange of views allows us to continue our fruitful exchange with the European Court of Auditors. As you know, the Court of Auditors consistently advocates for a simplification of union rules and landscape, as complexity often leads to increased administrative burdens, higher error rates, and reduced accountability. It is also mindful of the respect of the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality, which are also key areas of interest for Juri committee. Against this background, Mr. Greg Gregor will present the European Court of Auditors opinion on the MFF regulation. The work on which is already in full swing in the Parliament and on which the Legal Affairs Committee will also provide an opinion for the Budget Committee. So, Mr. Gregor, you have the floor for around 15 minutes and then members will intervene. Thank you again for being with us today.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Please take your bilateral conversations based on previous items of our agenda outside of the room. I know it was very intense and hot discussion on a serious matter, so you can continue discussing it outside of the room. I would like to welcome Mr. Cristoforou, member of the European Court of Auditors. I was going to say a member of the Parliament, which is not wrong. Mr. Cristoforo was a member of the Parliament a couple of years ago. Great colleague, by the way, uh, who led the audit of uh, court special report on enforcing EU law adopted in 2024. Uh, we have many members of great interest, including Mr. Mas, who is our standing rapporteur for this topic. But before that, before turning to the members, I would like to give you immediately the for Mr. Cristoforo for ten minutes. And welcome back once more to the European Parliament.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Good morning everyone. We have interpreters for the following language present for this ICM meeting German, English, French, Italian. Dutch, Danish, Greek. Spanish. Portuguese. Finnish. Swedish, Czech, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Maltese, Polish, Slovak, Slovenian, Bulgarian, Romanian and Croatian and this meeting is web streamed. The members dear dear guests, am well welcome you all to this Interparliamentary Committee meeting on E-justice lessons learned from the national perspectives. I want to particularly welcome the colleagues coming from national parliaments. This discussion is always important for European Parliament that will strengthen ties between national parliaments and European Parliament. Uh, this Interparliamentary Committee meeting is organized by the Committee of Legal Affairs, with the support of the director for relations with the National Parliament. Parliament's E-justice is a topic that holds great interest here in this House. Already in 2008, on the initiative of the Juri Committee, the Parliament adopted a legislative initiative report with recommendations to the Commission to E-justice. Information technology is essential to ensure better access to justice for citizens, to simplify, to simplify judicial procedures, and also to reduce the burden of costs of cross-border legislation and judicial cooperation. Since the Legislative Initiative report of 2008, important measures have been adopted in this area at EU level, including, among others, the launch of the EU Justice portal, various European EU justice strategies and action plans adopted by the Council, and also important legislative measures, including on taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters, on the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice in cross-border civil, commercial and criminal matters.”
  Jurisdiction conflicts between EU and national courts
• “Now, therefore, to the representatives of the European Commission, Miss Ines Rohmer from DG Fisma and Mr. Dan Dionisie from DG JUST.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Thank you. Thank you very much for answering the questions. Uh, Mr. Cristoforo, uh, now let's move to our, uh, joint debate. And I would like to thank the policy department, uh, for organizing this workshop. Uh, on the monitoring of the application of European law. As you can see, the topics are very much linked. Happy to welcome once again, professor doctor Helen Xanthaki from, uh, University College London. Welcome back. Uh, the professor for a presentation on legislative, uh, complexity and monitoring of application of EU law. Uh, professor, you have the floor for seven minutes, and I will be strict with the time.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Thank you very much for the question. Well, one of the reasons European companies are not successful in Europe is bureaucracy, the red tape. So this are the proposals. These proposals for the 28th regime reduces this bureaucracy. Bureaucracy. Companies will stay here. They will develop here because necessary actions should be done here. I support this proposal. It gives a lot of advantages to European business.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “At the same time, we are clear eyed about the challenges that remain. Further progress is needed on media freedom, judicial independence, political pluralism and the protection of fundamental rights. The implementation of international commitments, including under GSP plus Framework, must continue in a credible and measurable manner. Civil society and independent media must have a space to operate freely and safely because. Partnership with the European Union is the strongest when it is built on trust. Reforms and shared principles. Dear colleagues. This engagement also carries important geopolitical significance. The Epca strengthens cooperation on regional security, cybersecurity, counter-terrorism, border management, and sanctions enforcement. At a time when attempts to circumvent EU sanctions continue, cooperation with partners in Central Asia is essential. Respect for international law, sovereignty and territorial integrity must remain the foundation of our engagement. The agreement furthermore, creates new opportunities under the Global Gateway Strategy and the Trans-caspian Transport Corridor, helping to diversify trade routes, enhance connectivity, and reduce strategic dependencies. It also opens important avenues for cooperation on critical raw materials and green transition. Let us not underestimate the broader regional dimension. A strong partnership between the EU and Uzbekistan can contribute to greater regional integration, resilience and stability across Central Asia. It sends a message that the European Union is present, engaged and prepared to invest in a long term partnership based on mutual respect and shared interests. Thank you.”
  EU policy on Central Asia
• “Thank you for introducing the topic. We will now continue with the experience of Belgium with the transposition of qualified criminal offences in international law with Mr. Alhaji Musa Diallo, member of the Committee on Transversal Matters, Regional competences of the Senate. Who will lead the intervention of Mr. Ismael Nuno, chairman of the Committee on Justice of the House of Representatives. Mr. Diallo. We.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “22:26 – 16:22:31): okay next item is establishment of european business wallets and the rapporteur is mister vos and i'll give you mister voss immediately the floor for four minutes”
  EU regulation on financial data access
• “(17:04:32 – 17:05:57): Well dear Commissioner McGrath, it's my great pleasure to welcome you once again at our meeting today, this time for annual structured dialogue. As Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, Rule of Law and Consumer Protection, your portfolio includes issues that are at the very heart of our committee's remit. These include, among others, civil law, company law, rule of law, subsidiarity, as well as simplification of legislation within your areas of responsibility. The structured dialogue is thus key for establishing our common understanding on priorities in the policy areas of interest to us. Our committee places, as you know, great value on such dialogue with you, and I hope that today's exchange will contribute effectively to the work of the Commission and the Parliament in the areas of our common interests. As usual, following your initial intervention, I will open the floor for members for rounds of questions, starting with the coordinators. Commissioner McGrath, I would like to give you the floor for fifteen minutes. So dear Michael, you have the floor.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Please take your bilateral conversations outside of the room. All right, let's move to the votes. Proposal for a directive of European. Ma'am. Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and the Council. Establishing harmonised requirements in the internal market on transparency of interests, representation carried out on behalf of third countries and amending directive EU 2019 1937. We're going to start with 68 and 69 amendments and they are identical. I open the vote for 69 and 60, 68 and 69. I open the vote. Okay, I close the vote. This was rejected. Then we go to compromise one and I open the vote. I close the vote. This one was rejected. And then I go to amendment one. I open the vote. On amendment one, open the vote. Close the vote. This one was also rejected. And now we move to the final vote. And I open the vote. This is going to be the final vote. And I close the vote. This one was rejected. The next vote will be in camera. And the rapporteur is Mr. is the case. T136 25 and I will. Now we. Proposal to update annexes A and B of the Insolvency Regulation. These annexes cover insolvency proceedings in the Member states. This is a regular exercise which the Commission proposes on the basis of the information received from Member States. The previous update took place in 2019 18 and 21. The matter has been already discussed at the level of working group in the council, and the Coreper has already agreed the mandate on 21st May. Given that I give the floor to the to Mr. Miha Zebra from the European Commission for for five minutes to present us both the Commission proposal and the further changes introduced in the Council working Group. Do we have Mr. Zebra, please? You have the floor.”
  Transparency requirements for interest groups
• “Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, dear guests, please be seated. Minister. Dear Minister, dear Adam, welcome to the European Parliament once again, and particularly welcome to our own committee, the Committee of Legal Affairs, which in size is small but in content, is very important Committee. And I would like to say that the colleagues are taking this exchange with you extremely seriously. And this exchange, dear colleagues, is about the priorities of the Polish presidency. It's not about the internal political issues in Poland. So let's try to avoid internal clashes and debates coming from Warsaw to Brussels. And indeed, this debate is about the achievements of the Polish presidency. So, Minister, I would like to give you the floor for about 15 minutes to present the Polish priorities and the achievements so far. And after that, dear colleagues, will follow the regular procedure, starting with coordinators. And if there is a need, we will have a second or third round of interventions. Minister, please, you have the floor.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you, Mr. President, for giving me the floor for my concluding remarks. Allow me to thank all the colleagues across the political groups for the substantive and constructive debate, and particularly the shadow rapporteurs, for their very deep engagement all the way through the process. Indeed, tonight's discussions demonstrated something important while here, maybe different emphases and different political sensitivities in this Parliament. There is nevertheless a broad understanding that our relationship with Uzbekistan matters strategically, politically and economically for the European Union. As you said, madam Vice-President, this is not a blank cheque. This is an offer for deeper cooperation with Uzbekistan, and I very much appreciate your approach that Parliament will be constantly updated on on implementation, as some colleagues focus more strongly on geopolitical considerations, others on human rights and democratic reforms, and the role of civil society. And rightly so, because the strength of the European Parliament lies precisely in its ability to combine strategic vision with principled scrutiny. That is why the Epca is important. The European Union is strongest when it acts with unity, consistency and strategic confidence. This agreement sends exactly such a message that Europe is ready to engage seriously in Central Asia, to build long term partnership, and to remain a reliable global actor in an increasingly fragmented world. And I count on your support during tomorrow's vote. Dear colleagues, thank you.”
  EU policy on Central Asia
• “Thank you very much. I don't see any other member wishing to speak. Can I ask the European Commission to comment on on those concerns and comments and questions, please.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats. Dear colleagues, please be seated. Item number one is adoption of agenda. Interpreters for the following languages are present today German, English, French, Italian, Dutch, Spanish, Lithuanian, Polish, Romanian, Bulgarian, Estonian and Hungarian is a passive item. Number two chairs. Announcements. At their meeting of 23rd of September, coordinators agreed first to appoint a strict as rapporteur of the report of on establishing the justice Program for the period 2028 2034 and repealing regulation EU 2021 693. Second, to appoint David Cormand as rapporteur for request for a waiver of the immunity of Harold Wilensky. Third, to appoint Mario Furore as rapporteur for the request for the waiver of divinity of Jesus Brown. Fourth, to appoint Adrian Vazquez Quezada as rapporteur for the request for the waiver of diminutive Patrick Jacky. Fifth, to appoint Pascal Piera as rapporteur for the request for the waiver of Daniel Obajtek. Sixth, to appoint Martin Sypniewski as rapporteur for the request for the waiver of the immunity of Angelika Niebler next to organize a public hearing on legal capacity and supported decision making mechanism of adults in the frame of Disability Rights Week, scheduled for December this year. Next, to request authorisation of committee missions to Washington and Boston, US. Stuttgart and Heidelberg, Germany. And Madrid, Spain. On web content privacy measures next to send a letter to Cop and SEC regarding infringement of your competences in the adopted any report on the implementation of streamlining of the EU internal market rules to strengthen the Single Market.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Good mornings good morning dear colleagues please take your seats commissioner Dombrowski dear Valdez it is my great pleasure to welcome you and I thank you for joining us today for this important exchange with the members of legal affairs committee at the commissioner for economy and productivity implementation and simplification. Your poll portfolio includes topics that are at very heart of our committee's remit. This include among others ensuring that EU rules are implemented and enforced swiftly and correctly of course strengthening and safeguarding a better lawmaking process as well as simplification of legislation. That is why our committee places great value on establishing a productive dialogue with you. We are here today to discuss a commission's first overview report on simplification implementation and enforcement covering the period from January to July twenty twenty five which was published on twenty first of October. I'm confident that today's exchange of views will contribute meaningfully to the reflection of our members and we hope to those of the commission. Following your initial presentation I will open the floor to members for questions and I suggest that we proceed with this in rounds if there's a need for that. And without further ado I would like to give you the floor for your presentation.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Please, colleagues, be seated. Harmonizing certain aspects of insolvency law, and this item is under the consideration of amendments. Unfortunately, the rapporteur, Mr. Radev, can't be here with us, and I have the responsibility to read out his points. Well, I take my job extremely responsibly, as you are well aware, Mr. Rapasi, and I'm going to read out his points in Bulgarian. So please put your headsets. Thank you very much.”
  Jurisdiction conflicts between EU and national courts
• “Good morning, dear colleagues. Please be seated. First item is adoption of agenda. There is no objection I can adopt the agenda. Interpreters for the following languages are present. German, English, French, Italian, Dutch, Spanish, Swedish, Estonia, Lithuania, Hungarian, Polish, Romanian and Bulgarian. We also have Greek, Portuguese, Finnish, Czech, Latvian, Maltese, Slovak, Slovenian and Croatian. Interpretation this afternoon. Item number two announcement of the coordinators decisions at their meeting of 8th of May 2025, the coordinators agreed to appoint Adrian Vazquez, Lazara colleague from EPP, as rapporteur for the request for the waiver of the immunity of Petr Bystron colleague from ESM. Item number three adoption of minutes. If no objections are received by the end of the meeting, the minutes of the meeting of 12 and 13th May 2025 will be deemed to have been approved. Item number four. Subsidiarity. Under rule 43, there is no report under this point. Item number five joint Debate Policy Department. Presentation of the study and workshop of Generative AI and copyright. We opened this meeting with a workshop organized by our policy Department. Thank you. Policy Department devoted to the complex relationship between copyright and generative artificial intelligence. And for this, we are pleased to welcome three distinguished experts.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Thank you chair. Thank you, Madam Commissioner. Today we are discussing 100 days of the new commission. We cannot be but satisfied with the numerous legislative proposals by the Commission. Of course, we expect deliverables, not just legislative proposals. The message of the European citizens is clear. We, business as usual, cannot continue. The economy needs to be strengthened. We need measures to simplify business. We cannot allow business as usual in in the field of the of European intellect creating products which leave this continent. This is why the rules for doing business should be well thought out. Of course, security will remain a part of the agenda of the European Union. We live in a new environment, an environment of insecurity. We need to build the European architecture of securities with our with our own efforts. And this is why I urge you not to delay these measures. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you for your prompt answers, Commissioner. And now I go for second round and I have Obadia Hofer, Mariam Osman Mihaylova, Adrian Vasquez, Zahra Radev for the second round. So one minute each. Colleagues Starting with Obadiyah.”
  EU engagement with youth
• “Indeed. Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner. Dear minister. Mr.. Mr.. Thank you very much for bringing together all the diverse positions of the European Parliament, and allow me to present my committee's priority. The 2026 Statement of Estimates of the Court of Justice of the European Union requests the creation of ten new permanent posts to meet cybersecurity regulation obligations. The Commission unfortunately rejected this demand, and tempos have not been included in the 2026 draft budget, with EUR 570 000 cut. This jeopardises the court's ability to fulfil its cybersecurity obligations and to defend itself against cyber attacks. In light of current institutional trends, we must safeguard the cybersecurity of our judicial branch. I shall therefore remain at the General Rapporteur's disposal during the forthcoming negotiations to contribute to the attainment of this essential objective. Thank you.”
  Cybersecurity investments for critical infrastructure
• “All right. We have a good forum for this exchange of views. It is with great pleasure that I welcome today, Mr. Peter Hummel. Minister of Justice and Mr. Morton. Minister of industry, Business and Financial Affairs, who will present to us the priorities of the Danish Presidency of the Council and the progress of works in the Council. The ministers, thank you for being here with us today. I will give you the floor immediately for ten minutes each, please. Mr.. Uh, here's the microphone.”
  EU political integration
• “Well, thank you very much, Mr. Brent, for, uh, opening a new ideas and bringing some opportunities, but also drawing some challenges ahead of ahead of us who continue now with discussion on the Estonian experience, on digitalization of justice in civil and commercial matters, with Mr. Callanan, member of the Estonian Parliament and former member, former minister in different governments. Please, you have the floor.”
  Jurisdiction conflicts between EU and national courts
• “Thank you very much. Next, please. **European Newspaper Publishers’ Association representive: Good morning. My name is Elias Koteas, and I am the executive director of NPR, who are the two largest trade associations representing the voice of European public service across Europe. For today's discussion, I would like first of all, to start with two examples that highlight the scale of the challenge. Google's AI overviews that basically significantly impact press publishers by driving zero click searches, diverting traffic and revenue, and disrupting editorial strategies. And second, the proliferation of parasitic AI generated press websites, the so-called content farms. What we want to see, and we hope that this will be reflected also in the EU report by MEP Vos, is a framework that is fair, future proof and puts at its core, human authorship prevents the unlawful and unregulated use of protected content by AI, and addresses the displacement of creators and journalists from the market. Transparency is core, and transparency should be in the focus. Without it, nothing else will work. What we need is full and actionable transparency to ensure accountability and legal compliance in AI development and deployment. We need full disclosure of any use of protected content for any purpose. I would also like to stress that access to proprietary content without knowledge and consent does not constitute a trade secret under EU law, and cannot be used as an excuse to evade transparency and source documentation. **European Newspaper Publishers’ Association representive: There are studies that show the technical feasibility of full source documentation Confirmed. And we also support the idea of a rebuttable presumption of use by AI companies. Now, a couple of words on the opt out mechanisms. We agree with those that have said that these do not resolve the underlying issue of opacity in AI content usage. They shift the burden of proof and enforcement onto creators, and provide no guarantees that AI companies will respect those. So we ask for proactive obligations on AI companies instead of reactive measures by right holders. So just as a final words to leave with you, transparency is a core priority. Without it, nothing else will work. Creators control and enforcement of the rights must be guaranteed. Our focus has to be on real solutions AI users cannot use without permission. Content that doesn't belong to them. It's as simple as that. Fairness, accountability and respect for human creativity must guide Europe's digital future. And thank you for the invitation.”
  Transparency and oversight of AI-generated content
• “Colleagues, can I invite you to take your seats? Well, dear Commissioner McGrath and Michael, welcome back to Legal Affairs Committee. Uh, good that, uh, you are ready to discuss with, uh, members engaged with the Legal Affairs Committee. The presentation of 2025 annual progress report on simplification, implementation and enforcement. I know that you came from Yuri. No, you're from Libby to Yuri. And from Yuri. You are going to Emco. So it's a full Parliament Day for you. We like the commissioners to exchange with the parliamentarians, and we appreciate very much your readiness to be always with us and discuss the issues. Concern of the Parliament. Without further adieu, I would like to give you the floor for about ten minutes, I'm sure. Yeah, I'm sure the members will, uh, will, uh, speak uh, also. And I will ask them to speak, uh, maximum, uh, for two minutes.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Okay, thank you Mr. Repasi for your presentation and now I will continue with the shadow rapporteurs or their replacements. On behalf of EPP, it will be Ms. Wolfman replacing the shadow Axel Voss. Please, Marian.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you very much, Commissioner McGrath, for taking part of today's exchange of views and also for answering all the questions coming from the members and for the future. We don't expect anything less than you deliver so far. With that, I would like to thank all the colleagues for their today's contributions. Next item is any any other business. That is not the case. Next meetings. The next committee meeting will be held on 23rd and 24th of March here in Brussels. That was it.”
  EU public communication strategy
• “We move on to the experience of Germany with the transposition of criminal liability for legal persons into the national legal system, with Mr. Benjamin Limbach, member of the Committee on Legal Affairs of the Bundesrat. Please.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “Thank you. The next item is JURI mission to Antwerp. And I will take this item as one of the last and move directly to the policy department presentation. And this is now item 18 and 19 of our agenda both dedicated to the same subject reporting obligations Which is linked to the omnibus one proposal for directive that amends provisions of the audit directive accounting directive corporate sustainability reporting Directive incorporate sustainability due diligence directive and for which mr. Warborn is the rapporteur for the European Parliament and he's here But first of all, we are going to listen to the presentation of a study providing the overview of reporting overlaps that businesses face across CSRD Seems to me we are really moving in the room and she is Triple-d and the taxonomy regulation and recommendations on how to mitigate burdens caused by such overlaps We'll then move to a hearing on the same subject Questions on the study can be asked in the Q&A session at the end of the hearing now We have the authors of the study Professor scope Marcus and dr. Apostolos Tomodakis for a presentation of the study We have with us professor Marcus whom I'm warmly welcome. Welcome. Mr. Marcus And professor Marco is an associate senior research fellow in the global governance regulation innovative and digital economy and many other things so We'd like to give you professor Marcus the floor for 10-12 minutes, can you make it?”
  Sustainable corporate governance
• “Oh, dear, Commissioner McGrath. It's my great pleasure to welcome you once again at our meeting today. This time for our annual sector dialogue as Commissioner for democracy, justice, the rule of law and consumer protection. Your portfolio includes issues that are at the very heart of our committee's remit. These include, among other Civil War Company wall. The rule of law. Subsidiarity, as well as simplification of legislation within your areas of responsibility are. The structured dialogue is thus key for establishing our common understanding on priorities in the policy areas of interest to us. Our committee places, as you know, great value on such dialogue with you, and I hope that today's exchange will contribute effectively to the work of the Commission and the Parliament in the areas of our common interests. As usual, following your initial intervention, I will open the floor for members for rounds of questions, starting with the coordinators and Commissioner McGrath. I would like to give you the floor for 15 minutes. So you have the floor.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Okay. Dear colleagues, please take your seats. Colleagues, please take your seats. Dear colleagues of the Committee of Legal Affairs and the Subcommittee on Human Rights. I'm glad to preside over this joint hearing with my colleague, the chair, Sartori. Our meeting today continues the tradition of close cooperation between committees on the defense of international law and justice. And thank you for common work. Dear Munir, we will focus on the important question of the immunity of officials of the United Nations and of the International Criminal Court. This topic relates to the very foundations of international accountability and the effective functioning of international organizations. This discussion continues. A timely opportunity constitutes a timely opportunity to deepen our understanding of these issues, which have direct relevance for the interpretation and application of international law. And so far as the European Union is concerned, but also for the functioning of the international legal order and accountability mechanisms that the European Union supports. Understanding how the principles and practices apply in these areas is essential for addressing emerging challenges to the international legal order. We are honored to welcome three distinguished experts who will share their insights, offering perspectives that will help us understand the current doctrine and practice. This discussion will contribute to our broader reflection on how the European Union can support the rule of law globally, while navigating the complex realities of international governance. Dear Munir, the floor is yours for your opening remarks and the introduction of our distinguished speakers.”
  Support for International Criminal Court
• “Thank you. I don't see any other member wishing to speak on this matter, and I would like to invite the European Commission to take the floor if they wish so. And I was informed that Madam Alina Radu, deputy head of unit for DG connect. You have the floor, madam. @COMMISSION EUROPEENNE: Thank you very much indeed. This is a commission proposal that is aimed at simplification, very much in response to the Draghi and later reports, and very much due to Respond to the administrative burden that is currently lying with companies. We know that 55% of the SMEs in Europe report that administrative burden is their primary challenge. And this, the business wallet is comes in response to that. As it has already been said, it will provide for a unified and legally recognised and secure digital tool for public administrations and businesses to identify themselves, to sign, to share documents and to talk to each other and to public administrations. I also wanted to emphasize that it will cater for the needs of the self-employed and that of the sole traders. It also very much recognises the issue of digital sovereignty that was raised here today. There is a provision actually in the commission proposal that business wallet providers are meant to be European companies established in the union and not subject to control from third countries. Likewise. The commission, the proposal of the Commission also recognises that there are indeed existing systems that have to be considered and on which we are building on very much avoiding overlaps, but still reusing the existing system precisely so that we don't add burden on companies. However, at the same time, although we have in some member states similar systems, they are not a functioning cross-border. And this is something that is very important in the context that we are discussing here today. Of course, the business wallet, we expect it to be the basis of the European digital public infrastructure together with the EU digital identity wallets, and we are very much available and open for discussions whenever needed in this House. Thank you very much and we look forward to the next steps.”
  Electronic identity
• “(18:02:38 – 18:03:15): Thank you very much Commissioner McGrath for taking part of today's exchange of view and also for answering all the questions coming from the members and for the future we don't expect anything less than you deliver so far. With that I would like to thank all the colleagues for their today's contributions. Next item is any other business. That is not the case. Next meetings, the next committee meeting will be held on twenty-third and twenty-fourth of March here in Brussels. That was it.”
  EU public communication strategy
• “Thank you very much. Next speaker please. **The European Authors’ Societies representative: Thank you very much, Adriana moscoso del Prado, general manager of representing more than 1.2 million creators from all artistic fields from across the European Union through our 32 member CMOs, welcomes this initiative. We strongly believe it can contribute to properly implement the 16 acquis. Our three main principles must guide this work consent, transparency and remuneration. Because today the primary problem we have is the non-transparency and the non-compliance of generative AI services operating in the EU and the refusal to remunerate creators. We believe that the current legal framework, if applied properly, can ensure the necessary remuneration and development of a licensing market that the current practice is far from being satisfactory. For that, we believe the most important policy considerations that we would like to raise today. Here are the following. First of all, we need the creation of a functioning licensing market. And for this we need to require general AI services to cooperate in good faith with CMOs and right holders for either obtain a license or remove unauthorized works. So far, the Code of Practice process has been completely useless for this for this regard. If this first requirement is not met, we need to think about new legal solutions like, for instance, a rebuttable presumption of usage for generative AI services if they are not sufficiently transparent. With this, um, with their procedures transparency. And this is the second point applied across all the generative AI value chain, is a meaningful way to allow holders to exercise and enforce their rights. **The European Authors’ Societies representative: But unfortunately, the draft transparency template falls short, very short of that. Um, so far, um, we need also to focus on initiatives on actions that will allow immediate access to exercise of rights instead of new technical, costly and unworkable ideas. Projects like the creation of a central repository of information that we reject. Or a new dialogue to develop machine readable opt outs. We don't. We? We cannot lose more time. And we have solutions today in the market. Also, we need an application of EU copyright law to all generative AI services operating in the EU, in the EU, EU ones and non EU ones. This will be the only way to avoid unfair commercial competitive advantage from non EU based AI companies by circumventing EU law. And finally, we need to guarantee the respect of the principle of appropriate remuneration of authors and encourage collective management as the most effective way, both for right holders and AI companies to facilitate licensing and legal security to the market. And finally, we believe that, um, the use of AI generative output might also need further consideration. Under this study, because of the consideration of the detrimental substitution effect it may have in the market. Thank you.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Good morning, dear colleagues. I would like to warmly welcome Mr. Antonio Campinos, the President of the European Patent Office. It's a great pleasure to have you here with us, Mr. Campinos. We are committed to establish very good cooperation with the European Patent Office and we are happy to receive today your expertise on patents and patenting trends with a view to promote together high-quality products and services, which is of utmost importance for the Union as a whole. Also, we are looking very much forward to our meeting in Munich, but before that, I'm sure the members will raise a lot of questions during the exchange of view with you, and I would like to give you immediately the floor for 15 minutes and then we'll continue with the exchange.”
  Intellectual property rights (IPR)
• “Thank you very much, Mr. President. Madam High Representative, Dear colleagues, this House is not simply discussing on an agreement. We are making a strategic statement about Europeans role in a changing world. The Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with Uzbekistan comes at a moment of profound geopolitical transformation, global fragmentation and accelerating geopolitical tensions. Russia's war against Ukraine and the war in Iran continue to challenge the international order. Competition over fuel connectivity, energy, critical raw materials and influences intensifying across Eurasia. In this context, Central Asia is no longer a geopolitical periphery. It is becoming a strategic bridge between Europe and Asia and Uzbekistan, with its pragmatic and demographic weight reform trajectory and growing regional engagement is emerging as a key partner for the European Union. This agreement reflects that reality. The Epca is the most ambitious framework ever negotiated between the European Union and Uzbekistan. It modernizes our relations far beyond the outdated agreement from 1999, and opens a new chapter of cooperation in trade, connectivity, energy, climate, digitalisation, security, education and people to people contacts. But this agreement is not only about economics. It is also about political direction. The European Union believes that long term stability and prosperity cannot exist without the rule of law, accountable institutions, human rights and active civil society. That is why our report is balanced, ambitious and principled. We acknowledge the important reforms undertaken by Uzbekistan in recent years, including progress in economic modernization, regional cooperation and labor rights. We recognize the country's increasingly constructive role in Central Asia and its contribution to regional dialogue and connectivity.”
  EU policy on Central Asia
• “Thank you very much, dear Deputy Prime Minister Stefanishyna Dear Olga, for accommodating all the questions and variety of topics. I think the message of our own committee is clear. We are ready to support. We are ready to work together with you and with Ukrainian administration. We have the experience and the knowledge and the will to support your European endeavour. And was, but not least, we are very much looking forward to welcome you, uh, once again, uh, in.”
  EU-Ukraine relations
• “That was it? **Deputy head of Implementation & Enforcement of EU Law: Yes. I just wanted to sum up. The Commission is committed to continuing its efforts to streamline its processes and improve its performance in this area, while also ensuring that the quality and effectiveness of its enforcement work are not compromised. Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “We start with the PPE coordinator. But in this unusual meeting we finish with EPP coordinator. So Mr. Voss.”
  EU political integration
• “Well, dear colleagues. Can I invite you to take your seats? Today we have the pleasure of hosting Commission Executive Vice President Mr. Stéphane Séjourné, who was a member of this committee during the nine term. Executive Vice President Stéphane, welcome to our committee, to your committee. The purpose of today's exchange of views is twofold. First, to discuss the intention announced in the Commission's work programme to withdraw two proposals of particular importance to the Committee on Legal Affairs. And let me let me tell you that we had a very, uh, intense dialogue with, uh, Madame Virkkunen on this particular issue. But of course, members are looking forward, uh, to, to, to to have you, uh, commenting and elaborating, uh, as you know, first the proposal for regulation on standard essential patents, and the proposal for a directive on adopting Non-contractual civil liability rules to artificial intelligence. Secondly, this exchange will serve as a timely occasion for the annual structural structured dialogue, providing an opportunity to discuss other key priorities. In particular, the Committee wishes to address the reduction of administrative burdens in the EU legislation and the enhancement of the intellectual property framework, especially as regards trade secrets. Trademarks. The fight against counterfeiting. The challenges of generative artificial intelligence for IP protection, and the excessive costs of IP related procedures for SMEs. These are just a couple of the of the the points raised by me, but I'm sure that the colleagues are going to elaborate more on the importance of our common work. And with that, I would like you. I would like to thank you once again for being available for to have this, I believe, very intense Q&A part today. And I would like to give you the floor for 15 minutes. Please. You have the floor, cher Stephane.”
  Intellectual property rights (IPR)
• “Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner. Dear colleagues. A unified 28 regime aiming to remove national barriers and divergent procedures is an important instrument to strengthen Europe's competitiveness, technological sovereignty and internal market cohesion. The 28 regime offers a modern, simple, digital EU wide company forum for overcoming the costly and complex patchwork of 27 different corporate regimes across the union. This European framework will lower barriers to cross-border activity, reduce red tape and create business friendly legal environment allowing innovative companies, start ups, SMEs and scale ups to grow. To this end, the European Parliament's recommendation in Mr. Roberts's report offers practical measures for a modern, integrated EU economy that could facilitate investment, attract talent and foster innovation while respecting Member States social and labour legislation. Mr. Commissioner, I echo your statement. It is time to act.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “41:37 – 16:42:00): thank you very much just to remind the members that the presentation of draft opinion is planned for our jury meeting of fifteenth and sixteenth of april twenty twenty six of course so with that i close the meeting and the next part will start at five o'clock so we have a twenty minute break ***Exchange of views in the context of the structured dialogue with Michael McGrath, Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Thank you. And the legal basis for the legislative proposal in this will be examined at our meeting on 4th of November. And the vote of the draft report is scheduled during the meeting on 4th of December. With that, I conclude this point, and then we move to in-camera meeting under item 13. Request for the waiver of immunity.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to today's meeting. First item is adoption of the agenda. Can we adopt the agenda? Yes, we can interpret this for the foreign languages are present today. German, English, French, Italian and Spanish. Next item is chairs. Announcements. I don't have any announcements for today. Adoption of the minutes. That is not the case for today's meeting. Verification of credentials. There are none and term of office. We don't have any issues under rule four. And I go immediately to item number six, which is exchange of views with representatives of the European Court of Auditors. It is with great pleasure that I welcome today Mr. Jan Gregor, member of the European Court of Auditors since May 2016 and the Dean of its chamber five on financing and administrating the Union. This exchange of views allows us to continue our fruitful exchange with the European Court of Auditors. As you know, the Court of Auditors consistently advocates for a simplification of union rules and landscape, as complexity often leads to increased administrative burdens, higher error rates, and reduced accountability. It is also mindful of the respect of the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality, which are also key areas of interest for Juri committee. Against this background, Mr. Greg Gregor will present the European Court of Auditors opinion on the MFF regulation. The work on which is already in full swing in the Parliament and on which the Legal Affairs Committee will also provide an opinion for the Budget Committee. So, Mr. Gregor, you have the floor for around 15 minutes and then members will intervene. Thank you again for being with us today.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you very much. Distinguished experts. Dear professors, thank you very much for your valuable contribution to today's committee meeting on this important topic. And I will stay obviously engaged with you on this and other matters. Uh. Thank you. Uh, without further ado, I would like to move immediately to monitoring, uh, the application of European Union law in 23 and 24. Or this is the report of our colleague Daniel Almas. To present the main points of the report, please. You have the the three minutes, the usual three minutes for the rapporteur.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “All right, please, colleagues, take your bilateral conversations outside of the room. I know that you have a lot to say to each other. And please be seated for those staying in the committee. We move on to our regular discussion with Efrag work plan. This year, the discussion takes place a bit later than usual, as due to the omnibus proposal of 26th of February. Thank you very much once again for previous conversation, Efrag had to rearrange its schedule. I would like to give the floor to the representatives of the efrag present in the room. We have this morning with us Mr. Hans Bowis, president of the Administrative Board. Mr. Patrick de Campo, chair of Efrag Sustainability Reporting Board. And Uh, Madame Chiara Del Prete, chair of sustainability reporting technical expert group. If it's possible for 15 minutes. But don't rush. We have some some time for in depth discussion now. Um, I would like to also introduce the commission representative present in the room. Thank you for being here. And, um, we have with us this morning, Mr. Peter Wagner, deputy head of unit for corporate reporting, audit and credit ranking agencies in DG Fisma for five minutes, please. You have the floor.”
  EU approach to sustainability criteria in private investments
• “Okay. Next item is establishment of European business wallets. And the rapporteur, Mr. Voss and I will give you Mr. Voss immediately the floor for four minutes.”
  Electronic identity
• “Deputy head of Unit in the implementation and enforcement of the EU Law Unit and Secretary. Secretary general of the Commission. Yes, ma'am. You have the floor for two minutes. **Deputy head of Implementation & Enforcement of EU Law: Thank you. Thank you. Honourable chair, honourable members of the European Parliament. The Commission takes its role as guardian of the treaties with utmost seriousness. Enforcing EU law is and will remain one of our top priorities. The Commission welcomed the Court of Auditors special report. It was an opportunity for us to further reflect on our working methods for enforcing EU law. We accepted nine out of ten recommendations made by the court, and we are committed to implementing the necessary changes to improve our performance in detecting potential infringements and handling infringement cases. When it comes to monitoring the progress of our enforcement activities, we consider it essential to prioritize effectiveness and efficacy, which goes beyond quantitative benchmarks. Our preferred approach is cooperation with member states, aiming to ensure compliance from the outset so that people and businesses can benefit earlier. Yet, we are also well aware that cooperation and prevention are not enough and do not always work. They must be backed by firm and credible enforcement action. So on the duration of the Commission's assessment, indeed, the complexity of cases that was mentioned, combined with the need to ensure that member States are given a fair opportunity to respond to the Commission's concerns and eventually comply with the EU law, can lead to delays. **Deputy head of Implementation & Enforcement of EU Law: The Commission must also ensure equal treatment of member states that was also mentioned. And that means that infringement cases sometimes have to be grouped and moved together. The effectiveness of the commission's enforcement work is not only determined by its handling speed, it must also stand up to legal scrutiny and have a real impact on the ground. Each case requires individual attention calibrated to its nature. Both the factual and legal parameters of an infringement may significantly change during the procedure, requiring requiring new assessments and further dialogue with Member states. And important to note that when it comes to court proceedings, in 90% of the cases, the Court of Justice rules in favour of the Commission, showing the high quality preparation of cases by the Commission. The Court of Justice has repeatedly acknowledged the Commission's discretion in deciding on the timing of the different steps it takes when exercising its powers under article two, five, eight of the treaty.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “You share some good experience, how the authorities can cooperate, and it's important that we remind ourselves that only via cooperation we can achieve some results. As you rightly mentioned, I mean, the crimes are not stopping at any border and these issues are European issues. Don't take them as a national issue. And good that we had this, uh, important exchange between the national parliamentarians and colleagues here in the European Parliament in order to, to strengthen our position, but also to share some good experience. And I also would like to thank the European Commission for their honest approach on this, uh, so complex matter. So if there are no issues or to be raised or questions to be asked, I would like to thank you once again for organising this, uh, exchange of views. And I adjourn the meeting until, uh, 430, as we like to say in our committee, we have coffee time.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “Thank you very much. Dear Sergey, dear rapporteur, representatives of civil society representatives, the European Commission are, of course, dear colleagues for this very constructive and inspiring discussions. Let me remind once again that we are fully behind your position, Sergey. This is not only your position in your personal capacity. This is the position of the Legal Affairs Committee. And we see you as a guardian for the interests of civil society and European democracy in this particular file. With that, I would like to, uh, thank you once again for this morning and then, uh, see you, uh, in the afternoon.”
  EU engagement with civil society
• “Thank you very much. Mr.. And I suggest that we take the debate right after the votes. I see that the groups are already ready for the votes. Do you have the cards with you? Okay. So the first vote is on regulation, on enhancing police cooperation. Is there any problem, colleagues? In relation to prevention, detection, detention and An investigation of migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, and on enhancing Europol support to preventing and combating such crimes. Please, colleagues, we have important votes for those leaving the room. Please leave quietly. For those entering the room, please do so the same. Okay. I don't see the rapporteur, Mr. Lagodinsky, today, although we thank him for his work and this will be put to the vote and I open the vote. Okay. And I close the vote. So congratulations to the rapporteur. 25 in favor. None against, no abstention. ***Certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “Thank you, Mr. Saidi, and now we go to the representative of the European Commission, Mr. Thomas Dodd for DG FISMA. Mr. Dodd, you have four minutes, and the European Commission was mentioned many times in the last couple of hours.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much, dear Deputy Prime Minister Stefanishyna Dear Olga, for accommodating all the questions and variety of topics. I think the message of our own committee is clear. We are ready to support. We are ready to work together with you and with Ukrainian administration. We have the experience and the knowledge and the will to support your European endeavour. And was, but not least, we are very much looking forward to welcome you, uh, once again, uh, in.”
  EU enlargement
• “(17:04:32 – 17:05:57): Well dear Commissioner McGrath, it's my great pleasure to welcome you once again at our meeting today, this time for annual structured dialogue. As Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, Rule of Law and Consumer Protection, your portfolio includes issues that are at the very heart of our committee's remit. These include, among others, civil law, company law, rule of law, subsidiarity, as well as simplification of legislation within your areas of responsibility. The structured dialogue is thus key for establishing our common understanding on priorities in the policy areas of interest to us. Our committee places, as you know, great value on such dialogue with you, and I hope that today's exchange will contribute effectively to the work of the Commission and the Parliament in the areas of our common interests. As usual, following your initial intervention, I will open the floor for members for rounds of questions, starting with the coordinators. Commissioner McGrath, I would like to give you the floor for fifteen minutes. So dear Michael, you have the floor.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Oh, dear, Commissioner McGrath. It's my great pleasure to welcome you once again at our meeting today. This time for our annual sector dialogue as Commissioner for democracy, justice, the rule of law and consumer protection. Your portfolio includes issues that are at the very heart of our committee's remit. These include, among other Civil War Company wall. The rule of law. Subsidiarity, as well as simplification of legislation within your areas of responsibility are. The structured dialogue is thus key for establishing our common understanding on priorities in the policy areas of interest to us. Our committee places, as you know, great value on such dialogue with you, and I hope that today's exchange will contribute effectively to the work of the Commission and the Parliament in the areas of our common interests. As usual, following your initial intervention, I will open the floor for members for rounds of questions, starting with the coordinators and Commissioner McGrath. I would like to give you the floor for 15 minutes. So you have the floor.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law