Open menu

Values and rights, rule of law, security: Where does freedom begin and end?

Values and rights, rule of law, security

The European Union is based on a set of shared values. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights sets out into primary EU law a broad selection of personal freedoms that EU citizens benefit from, relating to questions of dignity, freedom, equality, solidarity, citizens’ rights and justice. The Lisbon Treaty sets out the four freedoms of the EU: freedom of goods, capital and persons, and the freedom to establish and provide services. Some of these values seem straightforward, such as the freedom of movement. Some of them are a little more abstract, such as ‘rule of law’.

Much has been discussed recently about the need to safeguard the freedom and rights of EU citizens. The new EU budget includes a ‘rule of law conditionality’ mechanism that will make it possible to suspend payments from the EU budget to Member States that do not respect the rule of law. The European Parliament just declared the European Union to be an LGBTQI Freedom Zone. And the COVID-19 pandemic shows us that the freedom of movement EU citizens are used to can be curtailed in certain circumstances. And what about security?

These rights and freedoms lie at the heart of democratic life in Europe. So now it’s over to you: What is the role of today’s youth in the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms across Europe? Where does freedom begin and end? Tell us about your ideas. Have your say on matters that affect your life. Help shape the future of the EU!

What people think

156 comments on Values and rights, rule of law, security: Where does freedom begin and end?
Olga Tsiplaki  • 23 April 2021

We all talk about human rights but do we know what exactly are they? Well, human rights are moral principles that create the standars of human behavior and they are protected as legal rights under national and international law. Human rights considered international and safeguard equality. They include civil and political rights such as the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and expression and equality before the law and many others.
We saw that the European Parliament just declared the European Union to be an LGBTQI Freedom Zone. People who belong to this community have the same rights as we all do. Laws that affect LGBT people include the rights adoption by LGBT people, access to sex reassignment surgery and hormone replacement therapy and access to assisted reproductive technology.
The problem is that there are still many countries that find it illegal to be part of the LGBTQI community. So, we, us members of the EU, must ensure that these people feel free and not ashamed because of their choices on their personal life and have equal access to education and health care. We should provide the right education to our children so that they will learn to accept others for what they are regardless of their colour, religion and sexual preference. Let's not forget that the young generation is our future so we really depend on them for a great and equal European future.

Sergen  • 15 May 2021

Sanction Israel for their continuous human rights violations and warcrimes.

Response to Sergen by Greg  • 05 July 2021

Hi,
Surely human rights violations and warcrimes done by Israel are awful, but in my opinion sanctions are not the best way to do something with this situation (even if these sanctions would be implemented, what I doubt). From my point of view the only effect of these sanctions would be limitation in EU-Israel relationship and making Israel more likely to trade with for example USA and China what wouldn't improve actual situation and only reduce influence of whole EU in this region.

Bayubasire Happy  • 15 June 2021

Security begins within someone her or himself because people tends to blame the government for their security yes I agree but before the government does you have to be the government of yourself first create security where you live and the people you live with teach them that before the government provide security to them they have first to provide it for themselves.they have to avoid things that create insecurity for them most especially youth for example some youth says that they have to enjoy life which is not bad but they cross the limit eg going clubbing thats where you find most of them are raped because they did not provide security for themselves or same are killed. This goes to my fellow youth let provide security to ourselves and others around us because security begins within me and you thank you

Λεωνίδας Καλτσίδης  • 18 June 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Community service for perpetrators of small crimes (e.g. theft, destruction of property, etc.) to serve their sentence through the creation of public works under the supervision of the police. This allows criminals to reintegrate into society, become an example for citizens and create a temporary workforce for the state.

Λεωνίδας Καλτσίδης  • 18 June 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Community service for perpetrators of small crimes (e.g. theft, destruction of property, etc.) to serve their sentence through the creation of public works under the supervision of the police. This allows criminals to reintegrate into society, become an example for citizens and create a temporary workforce for the state.

Al karh Maria Magdalena  • 21 June 2021

LGBTQ+ RIGHTS!!!
Gay marriage should be legal all over europe.
It should be accepted more.

Jan  • 23 June 2021

Battling corruption in Croatia by putting pressure on the government( most of which seems corrupted). Corruption here is still very widespread.

Teddy Nankinga  • 25 June 2021

Parents especially mothers should take back their roles in the family ?to save the future from moral degeneration and other unprecedented occurrences!

Response to Teddy Nankinga by N/A  • 03 July 2021

What you are asking is the past and not the future. Instate to blame women for everything, you accept people as they are. People should be free to live their lives as they desire. You have a right to have your opinion, but you can't force others to live their lives like you think is correct or want. Everybody's private life is not your business.

Kyriaki Charakopoulou  • 29 June 2021

Sex work is work! People providing sex services must be protected via national and European law form the ongoing violence and prejudice. Human trafficking (which is illegal and revolting) and the sex domain must be separated and not counted as equal. This is the only way to safeguard sex workers’ basic human rights in freedom of choice of occupation. Sex work is a phenomenon which we can pinpoint throughout societal history. Have the restrictive laws helped with its reduction in modern societies? The obvious answer is no. So instead of fighting sex work we should focus on protecting the workers and shielding them from violent behaviors by encouraging their rights!

David Popelka  • 29 June 2021

There should be more public videos and documents about what being part of LGBTQIA+ means, so people understand it is not a matter of choice but a matter of nature. I’d like to see some more LGBTQIA+ people included in videos promoting equality of love. I’d like to see more transgender people, intersex people, asexual people… Such videos and documents would state facts to help understand what LGBTQIA+ means, what being transgender means, or what being gay means. There should be videos portraying hate against LGBTQIA+ people, so others can see how bad homophobia is. There should be videos showing statistics how many people committed suicide because their surroundings didn’t accept them. All these videos should lead to better understanding. I believe the problem of homophobia stems from ignorance.

Петър Дундин  • 30 June 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

I think LGBT should not be allowed to be so ostentatious.

Response to Петър Дундин by N/A  • 03 July 2021

Makes no sense what you are saying. LGTB community is not asking or seeking for attention, but only respect and to be respected. Put yourself into their position and you would understand.

Response to Петър Дундин by Ines Saltiel  • 12 July 2021

They want to be accepted and supported. Also it is not like that affects you in any way, let people live their lives.

Leonidas Kaltsidis
 • 02 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Check by means of government documents (e.g. identity) to allow the creation of profiles on social networks (e.g. Facebook) from an age onwards. Due to the uncontrolled use of the internet by children, there should be constant surveillance and control to prevent the leakage of personal data of minors (e.g. sexually impaired photos). Anonymity on the internet allows many friends to exploit situations against children.

Prefer to be anonymous  • 03 July 2021

Don't do business with companies or countries who don't respect human rights. Simple as that.
Talking about rights, but afterwards doing deals with Authoritarian systems is a bit hypocrite.
Less talk more action.

Luca LISELLA  • 11 July 2021

Job market integration should be pushed further in EU by allowing remote working from anywhere in Europe.
The remote working should help improving quality of life by allowing people to move in places less crowded outside cities and avoid mass migration to cities from rural areas.

Ines Saltiel  • 12 July 2021

World leaders should view the world “globally” and not “nationally”, to focus on solving global crises. Furthermore, apart from stopping trading with countries that violate Human rights; body’s including the UN, give them power countries
(e.g VETO power). Not giving them that power means that we can take action against their actions.

Lorenzo  • 12 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

I would like to have binding agreements to enforce the rule of law to European nations

Jorge  • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The distribution of the Covid 19 vaccine to all countries in the world in a fair manner.

Ozlem Ertugrul  • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The court gives little value to people’s rights in psychiatric health care. The court repeatedly violates human rights. The court gives the psychiatric care institution the same every time, but actually the patients are equal. This is a big person who violates rights. And patients can never get away from institutions.

Natalie Jäger  • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

A way to suspend countries that do not (or no longer) accept the rule of law and fundamental values of the EU (e.g. no voting rights) and stop payments. It cannot be the case that countries within the EU do not comply with the Copenhagen criteria, in particular those of the rule of law and democracy, once they are members.

Björn Colonel
 • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The EU Commission has been trying to weaken or circumvent encryption for a long time, to misuse internet services as aid shepherds and to monitor 99 % of innocent people through data retention. When do Member States and the European Commission finally listen to our privacy, data protection and data security?
I therefore call for the above-mentioned measures to be prohibited by law! Every EU citizen has the right to privacy, data protection and data security. It is precisely in this area that the state must take greater account of it and stop restricting citizens’ fundamental rights. All the above actions create security gaps and a feeling of total surveillance. This must not be possible in a free and democratic union of states!

Yannis  • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Set a finite deadline (e.g., until 2025) for all the embers to pass laws that will be applicable LGBTQI + citizens to EU to form civil unions with their same-sex partners and also give the right to adopt to same-sex partnerships.

Yannis  • 14 July 2021

As our world gets more connected we must ensure that no one is left behind due to the unrestricted freedom of the internet. EU must pass a new directive about nonconsensual pornography including; a special cybercrime task force, a push to the national government for stricter penalties, and a special pan-European hot-line that victims can contact for psychological support, legal advice, and formal complaints.

Joan Marc Samó  • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Sanctioning all European Union countries with voting veto and economic sanctions that do not respect human rights and LGTBI + rights, and also requiring the judges and courts of the Member States to be impartial, as is currently the case in many states of the European Union.

Νίκη Καλκαντζή  • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

There should be legal sanctions for human rights offenders, especially when psychological violence is observed, a form of violence that is not perceived by the social environment and experienced by the perpetrator alone, who is caught in his thoughts.

BOUT  • 14 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

You declare that you suspend payments from the EU budget to those Member States that do not respect the rule of law, while adding that the European Union is an area of freedom for LGBTQI people. But what is the situation in countries such as France, which continue to cause conversion therapies to the members of the same community? Let’s say not the conversion therapies that make our union a homophobic and transphob area. Transphobia and homophobia kills, protect Europeans and punish those countries that do not respect the rule of law!

Hanna  • 15 July 2021

Member States who don't follow the laws and principles of the EU must get a time out of their membership until they changed their laws in tune with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and other guidelines created by the European Union.

Giulia  • 18 July 2021

My idea is about the LGBTQI community and you to keep them safe. In some of the European countries, there are laws that protect them but in so many other noes. If we want a change, we need to do it all together. I think that we should do a law, or at least try to propose a law that affects all member states protecting the LGBTQI community in such a way that they are at least protected by the union. My idea is to make it possible, in case of persecution in their country or non-protection, all those who are members of the community can be transferred and apply for asylum in a country where there are laws that protect them.

Louis Le Guyader  • 19 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Fairer social justice, more equal rights and opportunities. Universal European paternity leave must be created. May matter where you are in Europe, everyone must have the right to enjoy the first months with their child.
To move towards equality, reduce discrimination in employment and respect our fundamental rights.

Marta Flor Rodríguez-Rabadan  • 21 July 2021

Repeal surrogacy, regulate the rules that are now allowing it, and facilitate the adoption of children for queer couples and single-parent families.

николета  • 22 July 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

A common unified concept and the creation of a Regulation in the field of criminal law laying down mandatory compliance with the European legal rules to be observed by the courts and the public prosecutor’s office in all the Member States of Europe. As this is not the case in Bulgaria, my idea is to oblige them through a Regulation because the directives are not transposed at all and 90 % of Europe’s legal base is not respected. Therefore, there may also be a need for sanctions.

Artur  • 09 August 2021

On euroscepticism:
Based on personal experience I can tell that «euromyths» derive simply from lack of knowledge about the EU.
You want a stronger EU Sentiment? Brussels should dust off Captain Euro. Or any other colourful mascot for that matter who can explain in simple words how the EU works. Something lighthearted and maybe satirical but providing knowledge about core functions.

Shengyue Wang  • 09 August 2021

Unite social entrepreneurs in both private and public sectors to form norms that'll be universally acknowledged, based on existing EU values. Within the current European human rights framework, it's of feasibility and importance to share and mainstream best practices by a creating union-wide forum on diversity to fuel discussion, shape ideas and foster understanding. Examples include the Pride Business Forum in Czechia, where they successfully involve state-own companies such as Czech Post to be part of the diversity and inclusion process, which is an unprecedented case.

Alexia Kolokouri  • 10 August 2021

Monitoring on social media has become very crucial and an important part of internet's security. I'd like to suggest a stronger monitoring system. Since the beginning of the pandemic, all kinds of posts that had to do with the virus always get a small note attached to them where people can click to get informed about Covid-19. The monitoring system seems to be able to locate posts regarding the virus, so using the same system we could locate hate posts towards social, economic and racial minorities.

Sergio  • 12 August 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The EU must guarantee the independence of the justice of political power in all Member States, not only in Poland and Hungary.

EN:
The EU must guarantee the independence of the judicial from political power in all members, not only in Poland and Hungary.

Nikolas  • 13 August 2021

The essence of the European Union is being a union first of all. We clearly can notice the difference in states between north and south according to the impact each country will receive by the increasing growth in numbers of immigration. Also, the matter of my home county Cyprus that taking into consideration that it is a small country, nevertheless it is occupied by force by the Turkish Republic and yet the Union has done nothing about it the last 17 years which Cyprus entered the union and continues to accept all the illegal action that Turkey creates not only towards Cyprus, but also Greece, Armenia, Syria etc. It is time that European Union provides essential support to the member states and be the idea that promotes.

Dawid  • 15 August 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Human rights in the Member States of the European Union are key to the functioning of the European Union. The foundations of the EU are democracy, which is closely linked to the rights each of us receives – regardless of race, gender, orientation, religion, etc. They are inalienable and widespread. They are also indisputable. However, there is an increasing number of violations of the fundamental rights of every human being.
Living in Poland, people fear repression. Repression caused by ‘other’. The EU must change this. The Polish citizen is also a citizen of the European Union and, as an EU citizen, has every possible measure to ensure his safety. I insist on drastic measures to overthrow the persistent human rights violations, not only in Poland, but also in the EU as a whole. The European Union has the task of protecting and defending human rights. In my view, the freezing of funds should not be the only solution. The current ruling party in Poland is striving for a totalitarian regime, which seriously undermines the foundations of the EU. I believe that the EU should sanction Poland.
When we live in the twenty-first century, we should understand that everyone is equal, has his history, his dream, his passion. Everyone deserves the dignified treatment we would like to receive.

Lorenzo Fedeli  • 15 August 2021

The topic of discrimination against LGBT communities has acquired a significant importance lately.
Stefano Rodotà, one of the most important Italian legal experts, criticized sternly this kind of violence. Despite he highlighted that even the 'Charter of fundamental rights (eu)' prohibits discriminating policies (I strongly recommend reading his book "Diritto d'amore(Italian title)), it cannot be denied that there is still a lot to do.
I'm inclined to believe that young people will be playing a crucial role in order to tackle discrimination in our society. Let's make equality among every citizen come true. #unitedindiversity

Teodora  • 18 August 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Direct assistance to minorities discriminated against in the countries concerned. In the form of financial assistance or help to ensure that you can live in an EU country where there is no discrimination.

Rubén Gómez Díaz
 • 20 August 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Many young people have limitations on independence from family residence, such as the financial constraint, but these limitations increase when you are a young person with disabilities, as factors such as mobility, accessibility, etc. are at stake, leading to a lot of insecurity for the young person.
For this reason, I propose that the governments of the Member States construct housing properties accessible to people with disabilities only, where people with disabilities are rented for living in one of these apartments.
Furthermore, in order to make this initiative more accessible and striking for the disabled, I propose that these holdings have various types of social workers (employment technicians, rehabilitation technicians, special education teachers, social educators, spicologists, etc.) and cleaning services, who will offer their services at the lowest possible price to residents.
Finally, in order to increase revenues and make this initiative more profitable, I propose to enable the ground floor of this estate as a small leisure centre open to the public and a bar/restaurant.
In this way, governments will support the autonomy of people with disabilities by providing them with sufficient housing and resources to live independently and self-sufficient and create new jobs with sufficient income to make the recovery of the money invested in this initiative quite viable.

José Juan Núñez Timermans  • 20 August 2021

The EU should promote in all Member States a system of mixed
election of judges in those higher judicial instances in order to
guarantee the independence of the judiciary system. | #StandForSomething

giambuonomo
 • 20 August 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Constitutional law should be justified matter not only for Institutions but also for citizens (better: for human beings)

Szymon
 • 23 August 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

My idea is to modernise prisons – prisons are used by taxpayers’ money, in my view, people in prisons should be obliged to work. Most of their income is allocated to the State (inter alia the maintenance of prisons) and part of their prison pension, i.e. after a certain age, do not have to work in prison. In addition, in my view, any sentence of more than 20 years of deprivation of liberty should be regarded as the death penalty. Execution should take place in the main squares in prisons

María  • 31 August 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

80 years ago, we suffered an appalling war and many Europeans were killed because of their religion, colour, nationality, etc. It is currently a criminal offence in Germany to enlist Nazism and make any sort of apology. I believe that it should be extrapolated at European level and a law should be introduced at European level to combat these types of hatred (anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, etc.). There should be a law to condemn acts that encroach upon oppressive gifts or dictatorships and that did not respect fundamental human rights, in Europe and prohibit any symbol related to them.

Emily Vrahimi  • 01 September 2021

EU citizens should be more able to bring court cases in the EU court. Currently the criteria that need to be fulfilled to file a case in the EU are very high and often unattainable which prevents EU citizens from holding people accountable for human right violations.

Titusz Valdner  • 01 September 2021

LGBTQ+ propaganda should be stopped, many researches show how western Z generation girls and boys are more likely to be non-heterosexuals due to pornography on the internet, sexual propaganda on tv and in schools. This affects their mental health, and on a long term will hurt our already bad native european population growth.

Response to Titusz Valdner by Krzysztof  • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

There is nothing like LGBTQ propaganda or other. There are people with heterosexual orientation, the majority, homosexual and bisexual orientation. There are still gender differences. There is nothing such as sexual propaganda. Rather, anti-sexual propaganda, mainly promoted by the Catholic clerk, is an anti-sexual propaganda that imposes on citizens of a country their views on sexualism, procreation and marriage. Mental health is positively influenced by people’s fulfilment in various aspects of their lives, including in the sexual sphere. It is precisely the negative assessments of sexualism, stereotypes about the conservative role of women, including their right to choose their sexual partner freely and not subject to assessment, that have a negative impact on their mental health. As nobody is surprising that healthy lifestyles, eating well, sporting practices are promoted, but these principles of healthy treatment of their health no longer apply to the sexual sphere. This area also requires concern, to ensure that citizens have a solid knowledge of the body and of their needs.

Maeva Guignan  • 03 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Ordered to be led by multinationals who impose their rules. If nations impose their rules, then to survive multinationals will have to adapt, even if they denounce unfair action.
No longer allow the entry of foreign products which do not comply with European standards.

Albert  • 04 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The main problem we are facing in our time is the centuries-old fight against the values of “Freedom Vs. Security” and it seems to me that a top-down imposition on people, something nowhere around, brings us closer to the police. That is why I propose to increase my focus on this self-expression of dialogue, freedom of expression and hence the freedom to take the consequences of my actions. Because my troubleshoots the perspective of a world in which people are ‘good’ or ‘bad’, not because they want to be so simply because they agree or disagree with the current ruth. Of course, I am not simply saying that we should simply abolish any safeguards, proposes slow progress towards an informed and responsible society, let us teach people of consequences, debate,o dialogue, understanding other ideas, that people as individuals also have influence, that we should decide themselves what we believe to be good and bad, to increase the emphasis on ethics and philosophy sciences, but not in the form of learning people as “good” people’s minds, but what we think we should do as good and bad. Let’s not suppose the Principles of Society, create instructions to navigate it, because what we need is not yet more focused on hard walls that will share society and the means and ways of understanding and dialogue between even the largest of the rival camps.

Eric  • 06 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Creating a Europe of defence and developing the European defence industry.

Alexander Elliott  • 08 September 2021

European citizenship and associated rights should be independent of but additional to national citizenship.

Key points:

- European citizenship can never be taken away from you by anyone against your wishes, only relinquished if desired.

- The European Union has a responsibility to protect its citizens from authoritarian and fascist governments (such as the UK and Hungarian governments).

The two ways to obtain European citizenship:

1. National of a member state

2. The right to the basic freedoms (e.g. freedom of movement) should be earned after 5 years of working/studying in the EU.

Currently, if you are a true European and work/study in several EU countries for 5 years, 10 years or your whole life, you will never be eligible for EU rights. This is unjust.

Note: I have a lot more detail to give on European Citizenship and would be delighted to give more details in case of interest.

LADISA Gianni  • 08 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

A Europe of defence will limit the risks of armed forces taking control of states in a century ahead of chaotic events. As a reminder, the worst enemy of a democracy is his army.
Moreover, a common army will be extremely dissuasive, not to mention the fact that France has the atomic weapon. In a bipolar world, it would be wise to pre-empt itself by deterrence. The world is not love and fresh water, and it will be even less true in the near future.
Moreover, having legal tools to tap on the fingers of countries that do not have any respect for fundamental rights, including freedoms (yes Hungary is TOI that I look at) would be good. Not forgotten, it is absolutely necessary and immediately necessary. We cannot leave a single minute more than one minute to dance beside us as if nothing were to happen.

Iván  • 08 September 2021

Delete national armies and create the EU army. We are in a globalized world, what will a country of 2 million people do? Globalized world = EU army. We are the EU, we are one country

Response to Iván by Jakub Czarny  • 22 September 2021

We are NOT ONE country.

Roberta  • 09 September 2021

Nobody should be discriminated due to their sexual orientation and/or gender identity at any time, especially when applying for a new job, when going to the doctor and when applying for the rent/purchase of a property.

jule bovo  • 09 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

prior consultation of European citizens before embarking on any policy of restricting fundamental freedoms of human etr — demand for transparency of contracts concluded by Europe (e.g. vaccines)

Joanna
 • 11 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

One of the major challenges facing today’s EU is cultural and religious diversity. Against this background, there is an increasing number of conflicts and differences, although in theory Europeans consider themselves to be tolerant people.
The best solution would be to limit all religious practices only to designated places of worship (churches, mosques) and private homes. EU countries should be fully secular in public spaces. Regardless of their religion, every human being, apart from a church/mechanism and their own home, should not display their religion. The presence of any religion in schools, public offices should be prohibited. The so-called insult of religious feelings and reliance on religious conscience to medical professionals or other public professions should also be abolished.

Communal sites with monuments, on the other hand, should receive special care, but only because of their historical nature.

Patrycja  • 11 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Change the rulers. They continue to raise their salaries and are getting worse in the country. These are people who just want to take on. It is not about the good of its citizens. They do not listen to their needs. They are becoming more and more panic. Power becomes authoritarian. I believe that it is necessary to list the governors and to cut their salary to the minimum wage. Currently in the country, women cannot decide on their own

Tomasz
 • 13 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Request to European Parliament and Commission:
Please let Poles decide how they are governed by themselves in democratic way.
We do not need any foreign oversight over our judicial system.
Please stick to agreements and treaties and treat all countries large and small as partners.

Władysław  • 13 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The EU authorities, the EP, the EC should adopt legislative measures to ensure that, with a view to up to 2030, national budgets and the EU budget spend 5 % of GDP on the development of science, especially science and new technologies. There is an EU programme “Innovative Economy” but needs to be clarified, creating a “road map”. We are not proud of beautiful slogans, but create legal instruments that will ensure a gradual increase in spending and a favourable environment for science, mathematics, physics, computing, chemistry, biochemistry, biology, medicine, etc. New technologies are development, new products, sales, exports and means of raising living standards across the EU. Of course, we don't treat the humanities and are very important.

Radosław  • 14 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The European Commission should enforce the recognition of marriages in any state in all Member States. The lack of legal protection for families after crossing the border into the EU contradicts the fundamental pillar of the EU, i.e. the free movement of persons.

Kamil  • 14 September 2021

Request to European Parliament and Commission:
Please let Poles decide how they are governed by themselves in democratic way.
We do not need any foreign oversight over our judicial system.
Please stick to agreements and treaties and treat all countries large and small as partners.

V  • 15 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

I propose extending digital rights, adopting something similar to Bill of Rights for the Internet. Rights include:
Freedom of expression with the exception of direct physical fines or doxxing-; The right to offend must be protected under this document, as what doesn’t offend today may offend maine; Furthermore, self-collected institutions may charge offensive accounts in order to prosecute them to change
— Right to access the content blocked in the region in which they live
— Regulation of large social media companies, protecting users’ accounts from abusive suspensions
— Opening the sale of users’ data by companies collecting them to third parties, being used only internally
— Option for users to vanda the data at third parties, receiving the amount of the proceeds from the sale of those data to third parties.

Lita  • 15 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The stool of the rulers for the control of jams and ammunition. Facilitate the process by which the citizen can carry a firearm

Andrei  • 15 September 2021

In my opinion, a federalised European Union (akin to the idea of a United States of Europe) is the only way for the EU to stay competitive in the essentially bipolar global order we find ourselves in. Right now we find ourselves stuck between to increasingly autocratic and imperialistic states, the US and China.
In practice, I see this as functioning similarly to the United States, but with a stronger democracy. A central, federal government would design and implement policies in order to tackle continental-level issues, which individual countries cannot and should not be left to address themselves. These include migration, the climate emergency, enforcing human rights, a European army and ensuring fair competition in essential markets. In addition, a federal EU government should have more authority to ensure that the rule of law is upheld in member states, particularly in regards to human rights.
At the same time, member states should be allowed to locally develop solutions to local problems, including some tax policy, digitalisation, public services, to promote a more democratic process of policy design. More authority should be given to individual regions within each member state, in order to ensure stakeholder engagement in the process of local economic development.

Krzysztof  • 16 September 2021

I am writing from Poland to ask European Commision not to interfere in internal affairs of democratically elelected goverments. European Commision has no democratic mandate to rule over member states. Please respect EU treaties -defend basic freedoms but leave internal state affairs like judicial organization to democratically elected bodies of member states. Otherwise EU has no future.

Mircea Postolache  • 16 September 2021

The ‘rule of law conditionality’ mechanism is already showing its problems. How can you claim dignity, freedom, equality, solidarity when you are conditioning funds for COVID resilience to Poland and Hungary? How cynical is that?

Pawel
 • 16 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Set up a NATO fire unit with 50 rapid reaction planes for all fires in the EU.

Adam
 • 16 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Germany’s unilateral decision to admit 2.5 million refugees hits Europe’s security. The construction of Nord on strems 1 and 2 of Europe’s energy security at a time when other countries were subject to an economic embargo on Rosje – this was solely dictated by Germany’s internal interest, claims the right to dictate Europe’s conditionality and, in a way that is contrary to European law, which guarantees the right of all members of EU ROSCI to be treated differently. As a citizen of the Union, it does not compromise better or less favourable treatment of MLONKOW Uni
—on the issue of farm subsidies, a Danish or Dutch farmer is in a more favourable position than Polish or Romanian farmers – this creates an ever-greater passion for the farming economy of a sensible animal to open up opportunities for not older but rumunistic development opportunities.
— I do not agree with Poland’s policy of defamation on the basis of non-existent legal provisions, untrue houses and the bronze extortion of frivolous applications – French,German and other countries have not met with the decision of the European Court of Justice on several occasions, why such a very socialist framework EU defamates my country at the same time as not being confronted with the decisions of other countries. It is the introduction of unjust double-war standards.
Over the last few years, the EU is celebrating an activism network on illegal immigration, which has not been done and the mogus wqykazac has been active during COVID-19 pandemics, where not only has it done little, but even what it has done with many bleds. However, the EU will take back comments from its own infdolence,bledow and vigorous politics.

Andrei
 • 17 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

I believe that the idea of “the rights and freedoms with which you are born and pasting them as such” is also overridden. There are rights and freedoms as long as you comply with social obligations. The idea is that a citizen who respects social debts has the same rights with a citizen who violates the law and the rights of others, especially if it does so with good knowledge and bad intent. In other words, it is not entitled for a citizen who lives honestly, to comply with the obligations towards the spouse, to pay taxes and duties, to have positive social objectives (work, personal and community development in which he lives, security for those around them, etc.) to enjoy the same rights and freedoms with those who do otherwise. I believe that this egalitarian approach, which is totally unjust from my point of view, needs to change, and that rights and freedoms will be permanently forfeited and hindered when the behaviour moves in the same way against others.

Ina Vlad  • 17 September 2021

Encourage countries to have diversity among citizens like I saw in Spain. Black people, muslim people, LGBTQ people, hispanic people, Roma people and so on.

Krzysztof
 • 18 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Not for sanitary segregation and COVID passports.

Martin  • 18 September 2021

European parliament and EU institutions should work for citizens of the member states - not ideologies. There is too much ecologism, genderism, marxism, identity politics in EU institutions. We want to cooperate to develop our economies and improve our lives - not fight any ideological wars. By now it should be clear from history that socialism is not the sustainable way for modern societies. Please unite member states under the agreed terms and freedoms (see the treaties) and abandon ideological 'divide et impera' strategy.

Elvira  • 18 September 2021

First, stop asking just the youth's opinion.
It's their future but we, their parents, we want the best world for them. We know the past and we want they never ever live what we lived. So, listen to all opinions and take the best ouț of them. Protect youth of communism! They don't know what it means and might become attracted. Thank you and good luck!

Mevrouw
 • 18 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Women must be able to enjoy the same rights as barbaires, and abuses of any kind (physical/verbal/sexual) must be severely punished and aggressors should NOT be left free. For example, rape and paedophilia are unquestionably tried and punished by a sentence of MINIMUM 20 years. Sexual violence (both against women and children) is too often overlooked or punished by a scandalous small sentence, and this needs to be remedied by URGENT.
It is also necessary in all European Member States to have the right to abortion, as no kind of patriarchal value or institution of society has the right to interfere with the personal life of a human being.

Filip Emilov  • 19 September 2021

Hello everyone,
my name is Filip and I'm from Bulgaria. Now i'm living in Germany since 2015 but everytime I'm going on vacation I'm crying two times. First time when I'm going to visit my Family, friends, teachers... because I'm happy to see them again. Second time is when i'm leaving to Germany again i'm crying because i'm going to miss them. Why need I to go to another Country and not staying in my Country and work there and have fun with my family and friends. Bulgaria need to change, Bulgaria need a young people who are not corrupt, not liars and not greedy. What did EU for people like me?? Everyone knows about the problems in my Country but nobody does something why? Until when need a young people like me abondon their family and friends ?? Do something for Bulgarian people and for another countries peoples who want to have just some money to be happy. I don't want to be rich or something else I just want to be happy with mu family and my friends. I'm sorry for burdennig you. But i needed a big stage where the people can hear what i want to say.

Thank you for your attention
God bless all countries in the World.

Joanna Krawczyk  • 20 September 2021

The values enforced by EU institutions should reflect the values of their citizens. The problems of gays, lesbians, transvestites, etc are small minority issues and should be treated as such. Majority wishes their leaders worked for the good of European families, improving working conditions and standard of living, better education of children, etc. Please do not start ideological wars and resist being terrorized by small but loud and influential minorities.
Please remember that Europe is a civilization based and flourished on ancient Greek philosophy, Roman law and Christian ethics. For the European project to have a future it should concentrate on these fundamental values which served Europe well for more than 2 thousand years.

Response to Joanna Krawczyk by Krzysztof  • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The treatment of minorities of any kind by state authorities and by the public is an indicator of the civilisation of a country and its citizens. The rights of these minorities are not ‘minor’ rights. The high-profile opposition of minorities against ill-treatment is not terrorism, but a fight for their freedoms and rights. When it comes to Europe’s foundations, Christian ethics has not brought much positive elements to Europe’s history. Christianity has no European origin. Much of the wars in Europe for these two thousand years (which is not entirely true because Christianity has not had an impact on Europe for so many years, with Christianity not just one of the fragments of Catholicism) broke out precisely for religious reasons. To this end, Christianity represented by its capalists has been effective in destroying science, persecuting scientists or scholars for centuries, imposing its anti-scientific ideology. This resulted in the Renaissance era, which effectively reduced the impact of clergy and religion on science and society. It is now clear what the Catholic clerk is doing to impose its vision of people, procreation, society, science and the world on the ground. This is particularly evident in countries such as Poland, where the branch of party power with clergy is also visible and has an impact on citizens’ lives (the ban on abortion by the party power under the dictatorship of the clerk and Catholic associations, the introduction of religions into public schools and the introduction of compulsory readings into the list of compulsory readings by the various priests, etc., etc.).

Joanna  • 21 September 2021

Sexual assaults have been increased since the beginning of 2021. All the acts of sexual abuse should be considered as felonies. The penalties should be tightened and the perpetrator should be charged with the equivalent penalty. Also, all the citizens should have free access to the information of sex offenders, in order to stay safe.

Jakub  • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

And think that newdays, when there is a danger of hybrid war (e.g. cyber attacks, usage of social media users data, usage of migrants) there should be closer partnership between EU and USA. EU and USA share same values, they are Democracies and also they are in NATO, so it can be partnership on economics, social and safety ground.

Marcin  • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

I do not agree with the defamation of Poslka and Hungary for invented and unfounded allegations. If the country’s culinary is different and the EU has its own rules, it cannot impose anything. The European Community was supposed to teach the economy and not to impose its ideologoy, where Germany is taking cognitive decisions for Europe at this time and no consequences are drawn. The impact of Uni should change as only Germany, France and the Netherlands have a real impact.

Response to Marcin by Krzysztof  • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Poland and Hungary are not defamed. Defamation is spreading false content that is not in line with reality, pejorative. On the other hand, Hungary and Poland are moving directly towards an authoritarian system, with the dominant role of one party which the State and its organs treat as party shale. On the other hand, the European Union is not, in principle, an association of countries other than those which adhere to and apply the principles and rights of liberal democracy (liberal, i.e. which respects freedom, as a matter of simplicity). Countries with anti-democratic systems cannot be members of the Union. Freedom of trade itself is an essential part of the foundations of the Union, but the Union applies sanctions against authoritarian states that violate democratic principles and do not respect civil liberties and rights, such as: Belarus. If it were as you write, it would be for Belarus to apply to become a member of the European Union, which, for the reasons of the rules in force in that Union, is precluded for that time. The EU structures are described in the Treaties, which were signed by the Polish authorities. The revision of the Treaties consists of agreeing on a number of proposals in line with the will of the majority, respecting the principle of respect for minority rights (democracy works). It is not permissible to disregard the principles and ignore the Treaty provisions, as this undermines the legal foundations of the Union. For these reasons, the action of the current authoritarian authorities of Hungary and Poland is unacceptable.

Adrian  • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Full publicity of notices and recruitment results in commercial companies with the participation of state or local government capital.

Krzysztof
 • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

The European institutions should create mechanisms to protect the rule of law. A written set of fundamental principles of the rule of law should be created, understood as one of the cornerstones of liberal democracy. Breaches by national authorities in this regard should be promptly identified and national authorities should be alerted quickly to the fact that they are violating the rules. There should also be a mechanism for effective impact on national authorities that destroy the rule of law or take actions that undermine the rule of law. Sanctions should be laid down, whereby, in the event of disregard by the national authorities of the principles of the rule of law, the Union should have the right to suspend a country from the rights of a member of the Community and, in the event of further non-compliance, to remove the country concerned from the Community. At the same time, the EU authorities should reflect on the public debate in all European countries, which rules are mandatory, what common rules should be for the organisation of justice, the appointment of judges, prosecutors, notaries. These changes should aim to create common mechanisms in different countries.

Jakub
 • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

My idea is to elect the Members of the European Commission. It is now a self-proclaimed council of 27 people steering millions of people in Europe.

BARBARA
 • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Heil European Union

1. Our King of Europe MR. Tusk did nothing for Poles and Poles in his country.
Few had paid work and nobody had much money from Tusk
Why such people can become the kingns of Europe
Change the approach and be honest in the choice of people
Let’s be people who have something more to offer than Tusk
2. The Union is not a rule of law, it does not provide Poland with money due to Poland and Poles. Be governed by the rule of law and independent because you are not the European Union

Aleksandre Gulbiani (Young European Ambassador Georgia)  • 22 September 2021

EU should strongly reinforce rule of law within the Union and tie this ideal to certain financial (or other) obligations, so that EU’s mission to promote rule of law is not hindered from within

Sabin Rufa (Young European Ambassador)  • 22 September 2021

In order to encourage dialogue on all societal levels in the process of amelioration of frozen conflicts, I would suggest the creation of a Youth Security Initiative within the Eastern Partnership, in which young people from Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia and potentially Armenia and Azerbaijan could get together, brainstorm and have the opportunity to initiate certain projects, even in collaboration with their peers from regions like Transnistria, Donbass, Ossetia and other such regions.

Richard  • 22 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Marriage for all.

Jourdan
 • 23 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

It will not be very long... I just got to advertise the European Parliament on the TikTok social network. On this short video, we see a woman speaking about immigration and giving her views on the issue which must also be that of the European Parliament. This woman put forward the idea that there is no real border and that we can go to each country as we want. I do not agree at all with this idea, and in view of the comments under publicity, I am not the only one. How can we maintain a nation where patriotic pride no longer exists, where some people with French identity papers are not able to speak the language of Molière. In short, I find the situation quite critical today, so I think that this idea (which is totally in the course of European thinking, which makes our union so weak), is totally absurd and has no reason to be.

Marcin
 • 23 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Fighting disinformation and earning on news emotions.
Strategic security

Oana  • 23 September 2021

In Romania 3 in 4 cases of child sexual abuse are judged as consensual sexual reports. How is this possible? How can a sane person say that a 9 years old had consensual sex with a 53 years old? The EU should involve more in protecting the most vulnerable.

Przemek  • 23 September 2021

Ban LGBT-propaganda and penalisation homosexuality like it was in 80's

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Broadening the concept of discrimination

INTRODUCTION

The enacting terms of Directive 2008/0140 provide for different forms of discrimination, but also include a novel form of discrimination, known as multiple discrimination. Multiple discrimination occurs when a person is discriminated against by two or more factors which interact simultaneously by producing a new form of discrimination.
The first text prepared by the Commission on this Directive was prepared in 2008, however, more than ten years have passed and its adoption has not been achieved. In the latest progress report presented by the Council Presidency, among the reasons preventing it from being dealt with, the lack of legal certainty, the division of competences and the practical, financial and legal implications of the proposal were identified as outstanding issues. Therefore, in this proposal, we want to set out the reasons that should encourage the Council to adopt this Directive and, above all, the need for its implementation in order to achieve an improvement in the social policies of the European Union.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
Current EU legislation protects against discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age and sexual orientation only in the field of employment. In 2008, the European Commission proposed a Directive on equal treatment on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (Directive 2008/0140). It would close this gap by extending protection against discrimination on these grounds in the areas of education, social protection and access to goods and services.
However, it is necessary not only to adopt this Directive in order to broaden the scope of protection against discrimination, but also to incorporate a concept that we consider essential in the field of equality, such as multiple discrimination.
To date, the concept of multiple discrimination has not been clearly recognised by law or by the courts. The current Community legal framework includes a number of fragmented directives, with different areas of application, which shows that legislation and policies often address one aspect of the individual’s identity, thus ignoring the experiences of people with multiple identities.
In 2019, attempts to unblock negotiations in the Council on this crucial legal instrument were renewed. However, by the end of the year the Council had not yet reached the necessary consensus.
PROPOSAL
For these reasons, our proposal is that the Council should adopt Directive 2008/0140. The main reasons why the Council should proceed with its approval are the following:
— First, because it is an essential tool for extending protection to all persons who may feel discriminated against on the basis of their religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation in situations outside the workplace.

— Second, because it would be the first step on the part of the European Union to introduce into its legislation the concept of ‘multiple discrimination’. We believe that this concept is really important because on certain occasions discrimination occurs not on an isolated ground but because of the combination of several of them at the same time and it is then when we speak of multiple discrimination. This phenomenon is clearly linked to the fact that people have a multi-faceted identity.

— Thirdly and finally, we consider that discrimination over a closed list of grounds or limited to a particular area (e.g. employment) inevitably leads to a hierarchy in public and social care for disadvantaged social groups (depending on the volume of expenditure, the importance of public programmes, their continuity, their presence on the agenda, media coverage, etc.) and that this hierarchy is also variable over time and according to the political agenda. If public policies focus mainly on, for example, gender or race, other important discrimination factors, such as age or disability, are negatively affected.

As the EU is a geopolitical actor, whose main values are democracy and equality, the EU should adopt an approach in its policies that can address several factors of discrimination at the same time, thus ensuring that there is no exclusion of minority groups and a hierarchy of certain groups in its policies. It is therefore necessary to adopt legislation that does not focus on fixed grounds of discrimination and covers the possibility of analysing two or more factors.

These proposals have been set up in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Concrete measures to combat multiple discrimination

INTRODUCTION
Following the various amendments by the Parliament, the Proposal for a Council Directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (Directive 2008/0140) establishes for the first time the concept of multiple discrimination. However, the development of this concept in our view is still insufficient for a number of reasons, which will be discussed below in this proposal.
Our aim is to urge the Commission to adopt a Regulation providing for a specific legal regime regarding the concept of “multiple discrimination”. Similarly, we propose that this Regulation specify the necessary measures to be taken by the European equality bodies to improve the intersectionality of their functioning.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
Amendment No 38 to the European Parliament’s legislative resolution of 2 April 2009 on the proposal for a Directive 2008/0140 considers that multiple discrimination shall be taken to occur either on the basis of a combination of the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age and sexual orientation, or where the situation complained of falls within the material scope of Directive 2000/43/EC (racial or ethnic origin) or Directive 2004/113/EC (on grounds of sex).
The strict delimitation of the concept, either because it must be based on exhaustive criteria or because it must be confined to a material scope, could result in a lack of anti-discrimination rules where discrimination is focused on grounds not covered by the directive, that discrimination does not fall within the scope of the directive, or that where a discriminatory situation based on grounds covered by a directive does not fall within its scope.
On the other hand, when it comes to units dealing with gender and other inequalities, these can work together on specific issues, for example when the proposals concern “special” groups such as Roma women. However, there are no procedures to systematically coordinate work towards the intersection of different inequalities.
PROPOSAL
The “anti-discrimination” strategy at European level sometimes takes a unitary approach to certain forms of discrimination. While it is true that a unit has recently been set up within the European Commission (Unit G4) which pays more attention to multiple discrimination, called “Action Against Discrimination and Civil Society”, the increased attention paid by the EU to multiple discrimination does not reflect an approach based on the intersection of inequalities, but shows that a separate approach prevails in EU policy practice.
The Steering Groups bring together units and networks of NGOs, following a separate approach through which the Gender Unit G2 consults with the European Women’s Lobby and G4 Anti-Discrimination Unit consults with organisations such as ENAR (European Network Against Racism) or ILGA (International Association of Lesbian and Gays). In addition, if Unit G4 works on “multiple discrimination”, but does not deal with inequalities that have their own bodies (gender and disability), these may fall outside of proposals for action taking a multiple discrimination approach.
We therefore take the view that a further step should be taken in the development of the fight against multiple discrimination and, from the adoption of a Community regulation, to lay down criteria and consequences which expressly refer in law to the possible existence of multiple discrimination where there is ‘discrimination based on two or more grounds of discrimination’.
Furthermore, we propose that in one of the measures of this Regulation, not only should Member States be encouraged to set up equality bodies, but also that procedures be adopted to ensure that the units dealing with it at Community level cooperate actively and thus incorporate a broader and more intersectional approach to anti-discrimination policies.

These proposals have been set up in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Minimum standards for the protection of national minorities

INTRODUCTION
The rights of national minorities in the European Union are seriously undermined. The European Parliament, in its resolution of 13 November 2018 on minimum standards for minorities in the European Union, recalled the need for Community action to protect the rights of national minorities.
We can observe national and Community rules protecting the right to culture, the right to education, citizenship and non-discrimination. However, the lack of definition, as well as the fact that the legal scope is defined by the Member States themselves, accentuates the multiple discrimination suffered by these groups. Therefore, in this proposal, we would like to demonstrate and argue the need for a Community definition of national minorities by virtue of the protection of their rights and Article 2 TEU.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
National minorities, as distinct, own, unique and autonomous social groups, which form a substantial part of the EU population and contribute to the crucible of cultures, languages, religions and traditions that enrich Europe, are subject to particular discrimination, violence and disregard on the basis of their membership of these national minorities, which are often subject to attempts at assimilation by the State.
While EU non-discrimination legislation can combat unequal treatment based on the membership of a national minority, it is not an effective tool for the fight against national minorities because of their right to identity, use of language and education, cultural and citizenship rights, etc. Union law in this area is very limited, as there are no common standards for the rights of national minorities in EU policy or a common understanding of who can be considered a person belonging to a national minority. It is therefore usually up to states to specify that national minorities are such and therefore deserving of protection, and that rules would apply when defending their rights. There is therefore a clear risk that certain national minorities will not be defended in certain Member States and there is no mechanism for coordinated transnational protection of national minorities that exist in different Member States.
PROPOSAL
Firstly, we propose to comply with the demands of the above-mentioned European Parliament resolution of 13 November 2018 on minimum standards for national minorities in the European Union (2018/2036 (INI)). Secondly, we propose the creation of a binding legislative act which:
1. It provides a universal definition for the concept of a national minority, and may adopt (always encouraging the EU to develop its own) the definition contained in Recommendation No 1201 of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (1993) for an additional protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights on the Rights of Minorities:
A national minority is “a group of persons in a State which:
— They reside in the territory of that State and are citizens of that State;
They have for a long time maintained strong and lasting ties with that State;
− Display distinctive ethnic, cultural, religious or linguistic characteristics;
They are sufficiently representative, albeit in fewer numbers than the rest of the population of that State or of a region of that State,
They are motivated by the interest of jointly preserving what constitutes their common identity, including their culture, traditions, religion or language;’

2. Recognise to any group meeting the above definition a package of own rights (as well as effective instruments to defend them) that include but are not limited to:

a. The right to identity of persons belonging to national minorities: The right to be recognised for all purposes as belonging to them.
B. The right to use the Language: The right to free use of their minority language.
C. The right to education: The right to access education in their mother tongue.
D. Cultural rights: The rights to the preservation of the cultural and traditional elements of national minorities.

3. Provide for mechanisms to prevent and combat discrimination as well as hate crime and hate speech against groups that meet the definition, either as motivation or as an effect.

These proposals have been set up in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Linguistic rights of minorities in the field of justice

INTRODUCTION
The linguistic rights of minorities protect the individual and collective right to choose the language (s) of communication in both the private and public spheres. They include the right to speak in one’s own language in legal, administrative and judicial acts, the right to receive education in one’s own language and the right to have the media broadcast in one’s own language.
Difficulties in relation to linguistic rights of minorities are particularly encountered in so far as these rights are not sufficiently recognised in the public domain or in the civic sphere of the state. In particular, in the area of access to justice, much remains to be done, and it is therefore essential to analyse the description of this problem, together with the possible proposals for improvement set out below.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
The European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages, a European treaty adopted in 1992 by the Council of Europe, is the international instrument that best covers the protection of linguistic rights of minorities in the field of justice. Article 9 of this document sets out the specific measures to be taken by the judicial authorities in the various types of proceedings: criminal, civil and administrative proceedings.
When a state ratifies the Charter, it assesses which ‘regional or minority languages’ within the meaning of the Charter are used in the country and which languages will be stimulated under the treaty. In addition, the State is asked to choose from the list of obligations set out in the Charter with regard to various areas such as education, justice, the media, administration, culture, businesses and cross-border exchanges (all of which are set out in Part III of the Charter).
States Parties to the Charter shall report to the Council of Europe on the implementation of the Treaty. Since 1 July 2019, they are required to submit comprehensive reports every five years and two and a half years thereafter, including information on the priority actions taken. Once the regular reports have been received, a delegation from the Charter Committee of Experts will visit the country to speak to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) of the minority language and government authorities to assess the adoption and implementation of such measures.
PROPOSAL
For the purposes of this Charter, the term ‘regional or minority languages’ means languages: ‘traditionally practised in a territory of a State by nationals of that State who form a group numerically smaller than the rest of the State’s population or those other than the official language (s) of that State; neither dialects of the State’s official language (s) nor the languages of migrants are included.’
These languages could therefore be included in four categories: autochthonous languages which are indigenous but not state languages; autochthonous and cross border, which are indigenous and exist in more than one state, but are not state languages; cross border languages which exist as a state language in one state and a minority language in another; and non territorial languages such as Roma.

The reports to be submitted by the States ratifying the Treaty set out obligations to be carried out by the public authorities, such as: “ensure that these administrative authorities use regional or minority languages, make administrative forms and texts frequently used in regional or minority languages or in bilingual versions available to the public, allow administrative authorities to draft documents in a regional or minority language, etc.”
The European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages, by including in its definition such a broad concept, would allow Member States of the European Union to ratify this treaty by including in their compliance reports the measures they have taken to protect minority languages in the area of justice, for example.
However, only 18 EU countries have signed and ratified the Charter, and three have signed but not yet ratified it; and even several states have not signed the Charter.
Our proposal is therefore that the European Union should be asked to urge those Member States that have not yet signed the Charter to do so, and to encourage those who have signed it to ratify it. Ratification of this instrument would make it possible to take effective measures and, above all, to monitor compliance with them.

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

LGTBI phobia free zone, reality or myth?

INTRODUCTION
In compliance with Article 2 TEU, Articles 8 and 19 TFEU and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European Union has carried out numerous actions and legislative acts that have sought to tackle the discriminatory gap on grounds of sex, minorities, race, religion and sexual orientation. While progress is evident, Parliament’s resolution on the EU Roadmap against homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation and gender identity, as well as the Future of the LGBTI List of Actions, show that there is still a long way to go to achieve full equality.
The diversity or lack of legislation in relation to the rights of LGBTI persons in the European Union means that their rights and freedoms are infringed or altered, and the exercise of those rights and freedoms throughout the Member States. Discrimination arising from family law, in particular the marital status of persons of the same sex, is particularly significant.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
The latest report by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) A long way to go for LGTBI equality states that 43 % of respondents felt or felt discriminated against in any of the areas questioned and that only 33 % felt satisfied with their government’s actions to protect LGBTI rights. Furthermore, in 2019, 76 % of European citizens surveyed agreed that LGBTI people would enjoy the same rights as homosexuals within the EU. In particular, 69 % said that same-sex marriage should be allowed in all Member States. However, the lack of consensus on LGTBI rights legislation – in particular on family rights – makes full equality in the exercise of their rights and freedoms even more difficult.
There are seven countries in the EU that do not recognise same-sex partnerships, 14 which do recognise marriage and seven countries that recognise civil or registered partnerships between same-sex couples. In this regard, particular attention is drawn to the conflicts that this lack of homogeneity or legislative absence can cause with other principles and rights recognised throughout the European Union.
PROPOSAL
It is true that, in matters relating to the civil status of citizens, the legislative competence lies with the Member States; since these are free to recognise marriage between same-sex couples, there is also settled case-law of the CJEU which states that Article 7 of the Charter guarantees the right to family and private life and that, according to the ECtHR, homosexual couples also fall within the guarantees of that article.
In a considerable step forward in the fight against discrimination, the case-law of the CJEU has stated that, in application of Directive 2004/38, the term spouse is neutral. Therefore, under the guarantee of Article 21 (1) TFEU, a national of a Member State may move with his or her partner to another Member State, even if that family has been formed by marriage between persons of the same sex or civil partnership in accordance with the laws of another Member State and the host Member State does not provide for such marriage or partnership in its legislation.
To this end, we consider that such recognition is limited only to the application of Directive 2004/38 and more specifically to Article 7. We therefore consider that full equality and non-discrimination for LGTBIQ + persons is not guaranteed; preventing the free and full exercise of their right to family or private life in other aspects not recognised in the aforementioned Directive.
We therefore urge the Commission to adopt legislative acts ensuring the protection and full exercise – beyond freedom of movement – of the right to family and the right to private life for same-sex couples legally linked in marriage or any other analogous circumstance recognised in the laws of the Member States, throughout the EU.

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Criminal measures to combat LGBTBIQ + hatred

INTRODUCTION
The European Union is founded on the principles of equality and freedom, is an area where there can be no discrimination or violence on any grounds, and this is stated by the fundamental treaties. This is why the EU has championed equality and non-discrimination through a large number of its policies and introduced innovative legal frameworks to protect its citizens from hatred and violence.
However, many citizens of the Member States often experience situations of discrimination, hatred and violence, which make it appropriate for the EU to take action to put an end to these situations.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
In line with the EU’s fight against discrimination and violence, Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JAI of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law has been implemented. By ensuring that certain behaviours are punished by criminal law, the EU is fighting hatred and violence based on ethnicity or race. As recommended by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), in this proposal, we want to extend this protection against violence and hatred to another of the most discriminated and vulnerable sectors in society, LGTBIQ + people.
LGTBIQ + people suffer from disproportionate discrimination, in particular, they suffer alarmingly from hatred and violence. FRA survey data show that 47 % of respondents would have experienced discrimination or harassment based on their sexual orientation or identity. 60 % of respondents throughout the EU reported bullying or negative feedback from other pupils in schools because of their sexual orientation or identity. An average of 6 % of LGBTBIQ + people surveyed would have experienced violence or threats because of their sexual orientation or identity.
PROPOSAL
The heterogeneity of results within the Union is particularly worrying. There is a clear east-eastern division in the responses, with LGTBIQ + people from Eastern European Member States reporting that they have suffered most discrimination and violence. More complex heterogeneity arises when looking at the protection of these LGTBIQ + persons from hatred through criminal law.
In 12 Member States hate speech, i.e. inciting violence, discrimination and hatred on grounds of sexual orientation is considered a crime.
Hate crime would consist of an aggravating offence for crimes such as assault, when committed for prejudice due to the sexual orientation of the individual (among other possible prejudices). In 10 Member States transphobia and homophobia are an aggravating factor in the crime, or a different type of criminal offence.

We propose the creation of a Regulation on combating certain forms and expressions of hatred based on sexual orientation, sexual identity and sexual expression by means of criminal law, with reference to Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JAI of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law.

This regulation should oblige Member States to lay down criminal law rules which penalise:

1. Anti-LGTBIQ + hate speech: This means punishing inciting and fuelling hatred, discrimination and hostility towards individuals, motivated by their sexual orientation, sexual identity or sexual expression.

2. Hate crime against LGTBIQ + people: This refers to physical or verbal attacks against an individual motivated by prejudice against that person on the basis of his sexual orientation, sexual identity and/or sexual expression. This could be done in two ways:

a. incorporating a new type of criminal offence that punishes this crime.
b. Establishing an aggravating subtype that complements other existing crimes, such as that of aggression or abuse.

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Communication campaign on male gender stereotypes

INTRODUCTION
Gender stereotypes are role models or patterns of behaviour that define how women and men should be, act, think and feel in a society; they represent a set of attributes or characteristics that are assigned to them. Knowledge of stereotypes assigned to both men and women is key to understanding the origin of the root causes of discrimination and inequality rooted in society. Although the European Union is currently trying to tackle this problem with various communication campaigns, in our view these should be more innovative and embrace another approach such as new masculinities, which have an important link with men’s gender stereotypes.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
The Commission Communication on the Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025 commits the Commission to launching an EU-wide communication campaign to combat gender stereotypes.
On 5 March 2020, the European Union launches the #WithHer campaign, which is a digital engagement campaign for European audiences. It builds on the Spotlight Initiative, a global partnership between the EU and the UN to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls by 2030. It aims to raise awareness and challenge harmful gender norms and stereotypes that perpetuate violence against women. By raising awareness, the campaign aims to involve all citizens in the fight against prejudice and violence against women and girls in their own community and beyond.
In order to have a more complete picture of the problems that may arise from violence against women, from our perspective, communication campaigns focusing on male stereotypes are also necessary. We believe that the causes and consequences of these stereotypes rooted in the male gender are diverse and would need to be further analysed on a multidisciplinary basis.
In several countries, a study was carried out on boys between the ages of 9 and 13, or between the ages of 13 and 17, on what they understood as an expression of masculinity. Following this study, it was shown that there are a number of traits that have been associated with men regardless of the country in which they reside: tendency to hide or deny feelings, culture of risk (continuously demonstrating one’s own abilities vis-à-vis other men), importance of having and controlling power, etc.

PROPOSAL
Similarly, we would like to stress that these features are widespread, and we are also aware that there is no single, permanent model of masculinity valid for any social group or for any time. Moreover, even in the same society, there are many masculinities, defined differently according to criteria such as age, social class or ethnicity, as they can change along the life course of the same person.
For all these reasons, we believe that the European Union would bring the same communication campaigns into line with the new masculinities. We strongly believe that there is a strong need for a comprehensive study with various experts on this subject, as it would help to understand the male gender to a large extent.
In this task of changing the model, the use of arguments such as justice, equality, etc., although these are principles that we should not lose sight of, do not mobilise boys. Unless that injustice or inequality lies with them themselves. Hence the importance of analysing how sexism has a negative impact on their lives. In order to address this educational work, the starting position in which we are located is crucial. In most cases the boy is perceived as a potential male rather than a more equal man. This perception is the main problem. This is why the first exercise we have to do before continuing is to try to change this approach. We think that much of the male or non-equal behaviours displayed by some teenagers and young people are not yet established as part of their male identity. In most cases, they are only trials to establish the traditional masculinity. But the garment is not yet adjusted and sometimes uncomfortable and does not fit well.
Therefore, our proposal is as follows:
— The European Union needs to study this issue further in order to understand the behaviour of both genders and the phenomenon of cause and effect caused by stereotypes.

— Using a communication campaign this time called #WithHim, to help men understand the harmful stereotypes that dominate their attitudes towards women, but equally bearing in mind that they also have negative consequences for them.

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Rosa Almudena Vázquez Dichas
 • 24 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Against gender stereotypes in advertising

INTRODUCTION

Gender stereotypes remain present in our daily lives, are spread across all sectors, creating environments for intimidation and fear, and even limiting social and economic opportunities for people, especially women and girls. Within the European Union, there is a clear acquis communautaire on the connection between these stereotypes and gender-based violence against women and girls.

The European Court of Human Rights considers that stereotyping a specific social group limits ‘individualised assessment of its capacity and needs’. The European Parliament also states that stereotypes, as socialisation mechanisms they are, help to create people’s identities. So when we talk about gender stereotypes or gender stereotypes, they define images and ideas that limit the freedom of men and women to pre-established, artificial and reductionist roles for both sexes.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM

In the European Union, 44 % of people believe that the role of women is that of caring for the home and the family, while 43 % think that the most important role of men is to be the economic supporter of the family.

Many young people divide up, receive information and socialise on a daily basis through social media, TV or other virtual platforms. This leads to the fact that, in part of education and family, the socio-cultural environment and the way in which the media present it influences the perception of ourselves and the perception of others. In other words, it helps us to forge identity, values and behavioural patterns.

Thanks to the internet, a new space (wider and more accessible than traditional media) has been created where sexist and stereotyped behaviours that reach a larger audience are perpetuated.

This can be seen clearly in various advertising campaigns that establish gender roles, resulting in very specific gender stereotypes, which work together to perpetuate sexism in society. Examples include advertising campaigns carried out by certain cleaning products using women cleaning to advertise their products, given that women are associated with household maintenance. Another example could be certain deodorants or colonies, which stereotype man, projecting a dominant male power image.

PROPOSAL

In a technological society, consumers are exposed to stereotyped images of men and women that influence how we perceive culture and society. It is therefore the same speech, presented through advertising and displayed through various media (video games, advertisements, advertising, video clips).

Advertising acts as a reflection of a society’s culture. In that sense, it acts as responsible for the perception that a society has of itself, and may have a positive or negative influence on it. 46 % of European citizens do not believe that there is a serious problem in the way women are represented in advertising. However, if advertising represents sexist roles or stereotyped images of, for example, physical appearance, activities that are more common in men and women, behaviours by men (dominant, rational) and women (sub-, emotional), it helps to create harmful codes of conduct and categories.

At the same time, advertising also has the opportunity to have a positive impact. By conveying different messages, just contrary to the stereotypes being promoted through the media, archaic stereotypes still rooted in our societies can collapse. Similarly, new perceptions and identities can be created reflecting a more inclusive and equal lifestyle.

We therefore consider that in its communication the European Commission should pay particular attention to advertising and new forms of communication in order to combat stereotypes. Specifically, our proposal is:

— Develop an information and awareness-raising campaign on models for men/women, parents and families in line with the current situation. To this end, the European Union must step up its efforts to study quantitative data on how gender stereotypes perpetuate gender-based violence and gender roles.

As part of the communication campaign #WithHim (proposed in document 7), promote advertising campaigns that combat gender roles and include a higher proportion of rainbow families and other groups.

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Adrian  • 24 September 2021

Increase penalties for crimes, especially in case of recidivism, at such a high level to prevent crimes and to reduce pressure on jails by making the risk of being discovered too "expensive"
Have a minimum level for penalties, across EU, will further help having a single view in Europe

Oliver Z.  • 24 September 2021

There are a lot of vulnerable girls that are part of the prostitution cartels, do something about it, how is possible to pass the borders without no one noticing that they are forced or kidnapped, to see them on the street and do nothing? The punishment for this must be very drastic and harsh, maximum according to the law, destroying thousent of young people lifes is the worst thing possible.

Dawid  • 24 September 2021

Błagam o pomoc dla obywateli LGBTQI+ mieszkających w Polsce, nie chcemy być dyskryminowani i wyśmiewani przez rządzącą partię, chcemy móc wyjść swobodnie na ulicę bez obaw, że stanie nam się krzywda… Chcemy mieć podstawowe prawo jakim jest zawieranie związków partnerskich! Prawo do świeckiej i rzetelnej edukacji! Polki i Polacy są manipulowani przez rządząca partię, partię nienawiści która ogranicza nawet prawa kobiet. Kiedy się to wreszcie zmieni? Jeżeli Polski rząd dopiero zrozumie swoje błędy gdy zostaną wstrzymane środki pieniężne przepływające z UE to i tak całkowicie popieram takie rozwiązanie.

Traian  • 24 September 2021

Caderea Comunismumui a dus la Destabilizarea fostelor tari comuniste, economic, social, politic, cultural, fapt ce a creat Pista Libera pentru Coruptie in toate sectoarele de activitate. Legile sunt in favoarea Infractorilor.

Victoria Rodriguez Piceda
 • 25 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COPENHAGEN COMMISSION

Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union sets out the principles of accession to the European Union known as the ‘Copenhagen Criteria’, namely that the State must have stable and democratic institutions, respecting the rule of law and human and minority rights. The problem arises as a result of the actions of certain states which, once they are members of the European Union, are not continuing to defend these values and take a challenging direction to liberal democracy. This drift restricts the capacity of citizens as political actors
in society, it undermines their rights as legal subjects and their fundamental freedoms. Significant cases of serious threats to the rule of law have been observed in recent years, thus jeopardising some of the principles deriving from this notion and the fundamental democratic principle of the Union. It also jeopardises the political and institutional stability of Europe. In this context, the European institutions have encountered difficulties in dealing with these threats and in developing swift reaction procedures. Some Member States have shown their mistrust towards the European institutions as they consider that they undermine their sovereignty and exceed their powers. Thus, the lack of a robust alert mechanism for threats to the rule of law causes public mistrust towards institutions.
It is therefore proposed to design an early warning mechanism for non-compliance with the Copenhagen criteria. In addition, the mechanism would serve as a constant monitoring of all Member States. The mechanism is based on the establishment of a committee called the “Copenhagen Commission”. This committee would be composed of independent politically and institutionally (experts)
in law, judges and academics) for a term of 6 years. The number of experts should not exceed 2/3 of the total number of Member States, in order to avoid any national interest and increase the supranationality of the committee. In order to maintain independence, the members of the committee should be elected on a proposal from the Commission and with the approval of the Parliament and the Council. The role of this Commission would be to issue opinions on possible threats by Member States to the rule of law and established democratic quality criteria.
These opinions should include the description of the threat, the cause, the legal and socio-economic consequences and a possible means of solution, including the negotiating path of dialogue and recommending, should the previous one fail, other avenues of existing ones. The Copenhagen Commission opinions would politically bind the Commission in activating the policy procedures of the Rule of Law Framework.
Opinions would be adopted by a dual method: either by consensus or by simple majority of members in the event of a vote, the latter being relatively easy to achieve, which would bring speed to the process devised by the Copenhagen Commission. The Copenhagen Commission does not seek to change political and legal procedures on respect for democracy and the rule of law, nor does it intend to duplicate work and existing instruments. The Copenhagen Commission will work with other bodies and bodies working on respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights (the European Commission, the European Parliament, the European Agency for Fundamental Rights, the Venice Commission, among others).

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Victoria Rodriguez Piceda
 • 25 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COPENHAGEN COMMISSION

Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union sets out the principles of accession to the European Union known as the ‘Copenhagen Criteria’, namely that the State must have stable and democratic institutions, respecting the rule of law and human and minority rights. The problem arises as a result of the actions of certain states which, once they are members of the European Union, are not continuing to defend these values and take a challenging direction to liberal democracy. This drift restricts the capacity of citizens as political actors
in society, it undermines their rights as legal subjects and their fundamental freedoms. Significant cases of serious threats to the rule of law have been observed in recent years, thus jeopardising some of the principles deriving from this notion and the fundamental democratic principle of the Union. It also jeopardises the political and institutional stability of Europe. In this context, the European institutions have encountered difficulties in dealing with these threats and in developing swift reaction procedures. Some Member States have shown their mistrust towards the European institutions as they consider that they undermine their sovereignty and exceed their powers. Thus, the lack of a robust alert mechanism for threats to the rule of law causes public mistrust towards institutions.
It is therefore proposed to design an early warning mechanism for non-compliance with the Copenhagen criteria. In addition, the mechanism would serve as a constant monitoring of all Member States. The mechanism is based on the establishment of a committee called the “Copenhagen Commission”. This committee would be composed of independent politically and institutionally (experts)
in law, judges and academics) for a term of 6 years. The number of experts should not exceed 2/3 of the total number of Member States, in order to avoid any national interest and increase the supranationality of the committee. In order to maintain independence, the members of the committee should be elected on a proposal from the Commission and with the approval of the Parliament and the Council. The role of this Commission would be to issue opinions on possible threats by Member States to the rule of law and established democratic quality criteria.
These opinions should include the description of the threat, the cause, the legal and socio-economic consequences and a possible means of solution, including the negotiating path of dialogue and recommending, should the previous one fail, other avenues of existing ones. The Copenhagen Commission opinions would politically bind the Commission in activating the policy procedures of the Rule of Law Framework.
Opinions would be adopted by a dual method: either by consensus or by simple majority of members in the event of a vote, the latter being relatively easy to achieve, which would bring speed to the process devised by the Copenhagen Commission. The Copenhagen Commission does not seek to change political and legal procedures on respect for democracy and the rule of law, nor does it intend to duplicate work and existing instruments. The Copenhagen Commission will work with other bodies and bodies working on respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights (the European Commission, the European Parliament, the European Agency for Fundamental Rights, the Venice Commission, among others).

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Victory
 • 25 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

AMENDMENTS TO THE RULE OF LAW FRAMEWORK:
TIME AND RESPONSE TIMES

The early warning mechanism for possible breaches of the rule of law is based on a dialogue between the Commission and the State concerned and, although it sometimes fails to achieve the desired results, the problem lies in the delays needed to know whether it will correct its democratic drift: first, the recommendations made by the Commission on many occasions are answered after several months without specifying the timeframe for their response. It conducts investigations into the State concerned, requesting legal, political and socio-economic information. Collecting data, opinions presented by the Venice Commission, as well as reports from fundamental rights agencies and networks
judicial, concluding on recommendations to be sent to the Member State. An arduous process which, as a result of recent experience, ends up stagnating in the face of manifest passivity on the part of the addressees. Secondly, communications between the Commission and the Member State in the form of letters, letters, face-to-face meetings, accountability, etc., although indispensable in the procedure, provide indications as to what effects they are having and whether our efforts are being pursued correctly. Knowing this, it makes no sense to insist whether they are
evasive and uncooperative, without clear answers. It hosts hopes without rational grounds. As a result, they slow down the early warning mechanism by failing to address threats to the rule of law effectively, values of Article 2 TEU. Ultimately, the absence of specific response times, underpinned by a legal basis for triggering the defence of the rule of law. Trust in the institutions and the European project is at stake, and the Commission as guardian of the treaties must take the leading voice by recalling that “respect for the rule of law is a
prerequisite for the protection of fundamental rights’.

The so-called 2014 Rule of Law Framework does not have a strict legal structure setting the response times between the State and the Commission, as well as the number of recommendations needed to avoid the protection of the rule of law. In order to “avoid escalating actions by the Member State that seriously jeopardises EU values”, clear milestones need to be set.

Step 1: Two maximum Commission recommendations. This will enhance the importance of the reports by giving greater value to each of them. The formulation time between the first and second recommendations should not take longer than is strictly necessary, depending on the needs of the Commission, and bearing in mind when they are answered by the State in question.
Step 2: Six months between the first and second months for the State to provide the relevant replies. At the same time for the second report, time may be reduced depending on the circumstances considered by the Commission. Taking into account compliance with guarantees, gathering information, analysing the degree of compliance, etc., we consider this deadline to be feasible. The establishment of specific deadlines is not incompatible with the exchange of communications between the State and the Commission, the maintenance of other mechanisms of action, legal remedies, infringement or request of the mechanism of Article 7 TEU (preventive), although it is logical that it should be activated once the Rule of Law Framework has failed. Other mechanisms such as infringement, contained in Article 258 TFEU, have proven to be efficient against states in their democratic drift (limited to breaches of law
of the Union), as a tool initiated by the Commission. Simultaneous submission shows that the mechanisms of Article 7 TEU and the infringement procedure in defence of the common values of European citizenship may be the same or complementary. It is up to the Commission to play a leading role as guardian of the treaties, as well as to regain confidence in the European project and stand firm in its defence. These measures will largely reverse the slowness and tolerance that we have been engaged in in recent years. The Commission’s experience of 27 April 2020 demonstrates its ability to handle these situations rigorously, as well as a well-recognised and lawful framework. Without substantial changes involving major Treaty reforms
constituencies, but offering a real “area of freedom, security and justice without internal borders” that regains trust in the institutions.

These proposals have been created in the framework of the Forum x the Future of the European Union, a Team Europe initiative.

Victoria  • 25 September 2021

HACIA LA INSTITUCIONALIZACIÓN DEL EU SCOREBOARD

Si bien desde su creación el instrumento ha tenido el objetivo de observar el cumplimiento del Estado de Derecho, su capacidad ha sido limitada. En primer lugar, el EU Justice Scoreboard únicamente ofrece datos sobre la justicia civil, comercial y administrativa dejando de lado la información sobre la justicia penal y otros derechos fundamentales. En segundo lugar, no ofrece una evaluación regular por áreas temáticas que incluyan de modo comprensivo las diferentes dimensiones del Estado de Derecho, la democracia y los derechos fundamentales. Tampoco existe una rendición de cuentas por parte del resto de las instituciones europeas como el Parlamento Europeo o el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea. Asimismo, sobre la base de las conclusiones del EU Justice Scoreboard, en el contexto del Semestre Europeo, la
Comisión solo puede elaborar recomendaciones no vinculantes y específicas de cada Estado miembro en el ámbito de la justicia, que podrán ser remitidas al Consejo quien será el responsable de aplicar el diálogo con el Estado miembro investigado. En este contexto,
consideramos relevante desarrollar una herramienta que permita evaluar adecuadamente sobre los datos de referencia, identificar objetivos (mensurables, acordados, realistas, concretos y oportunos) y velar por que se preste la suficiente atención a los resultados del instrumento.

Es necesario transformar el EU Justice Scoreboard es un mecanismo anual de monitoreo que sea capaz de añadir valor en la identificación del cumplimiento del Estado de Derecho, la democracia y los derechos fundamentales en los Estados Miembros, en particular, es necesario perfeccionar los aspectos metodológico de la herramienta y la transparencia de los datos y las conclusiones formuladas. Para ello es fundamental la intervención de los expertos independientes, sociedad civil, la Agencia de Derechos Fundamentales, la Comisión, el Parlamento Europeo, el Consejo y otros órganos para desarrollar y comentar el informe anual.
(1) Por una metodología más robusta: el Estado de Derecho no es un concepto libre de valores y presenta diversas dimensiones11. Para ello, la importancia de desarrollar una herramienta comparativa para controlar la situación en los Estados miembros. En este contexto, es necesario aplicar una definición integral y más amplia e identificar los indicadores claves del Estado de Derecho. El enfoque de la herramienta de seguimiento debe extenderse al sistema de justicia penal y debe complementarse con una mayor
atención a los aspectos relacionados con la protección de los derechos fundamentales de las personas y la democracia. La mejora en la detección temprana de las amenazas al Estado Derecho es fundamental para evitar la escalada del conflicto y asegurar que
los Estados Miembros se comprometan en las reformas que permitan cumplimentar con los valores fundamentales y el derecho de la Unión Europea.
(2) Por una herramienta más transparente: el cumplimiento del Estado de Derecho afecta la vida cotidiana de todos los ciudadanos europeos. Por ello es necesario proveer datos verificables, creíbles y comparables. Un paso esencial sería asegurar un alto estándar
de imparcialidad y credibilidad para la Institución que compila y analiza los datos. Además, se debería asegurar que cada etapa del proceso cumpla con los más estándares democráticos y de control. A pesar de estas limitaciones, es posible adoptar el planteamiento de centrarse en los resultados, tanto en la fase de identificación del
proyecto como durante las posteriores actividades de supervisión y evaluación, y puede ser un catalizador para mejorar el suministro de servicios.

El establecimiento de un mecanismo común y objetivo de indicadores del Estado de Derecho
en la UE podría proporcionar, garantizar y reforzar la aplicación práctica del principio de
confianza mutua. La armonización de un sistema de seguimiento y evaluación específico de la UE garantizaría la "coherencia y uniformidad", sino más bien en la interpretación real de, cumplimiento de los Estados con los principios fundamentales legales y las características específicas del Derecho de la UE.

Estas propuestas han sido creadas en el marco del Foro x el Futuro de la Union europea, una inciativa de Equipo Europa

Victoria  • 25 September 2021

UN CICLO ÚNICO PARA EL ESTADO DE DERECHO, DEMOCRACIA Y DERECHOS FUNDAMENTALES

La Unión Europea hasta ahora no ha podido abordar de manera integral las violaciones de los valores de la UE a través de sus actividades de seguimiento y ejecución. Las razones de este
fracaso son una combinación de factores como la fragmentación de herramientas, la ausencia de un mecanismo de seguimiento general que contemple los aspectos del Estado de Derecho,
la democracia y derechos fundamentales, y, asimismo, la débil aplicación de estos instrumentos. Los diversos esfuerzos de crear nuevos instrumentos no han sido acompañados por una armonización y coordinación de los mismos. En octubre de 2020, el Parlamento Europeo votó la iniciativa de reforma, elaborada por el eurodiputado, eslovaco Michal Simecka, sobre un nuevo mecanismo que armonice varias herramientas para supervisar el
respeto del Estado de Derecho y los valores europeos. Por ello consideramos urgente que las instituciones europeas, en base a la propuesta del Parlamento, negocien un instrumento que
permita a la UE hacer mucho más en la defensa de los derechos fundamentales, democracia, Estado de Derecho en sus Estados miembros.

Se invita a la Comisión Europea a la inmediata negociación de un nuevo pacto interinstitucional entre el Parlamento, la Comisión y el Consejo para la implementación de un “Ciclo de Seguimiento Anual de los valores de la Unión”. El acuerdo debe contemplar los siguientes puntos:
● La implementación de un “Ciclo de Seguimiento Anual”, como parte del cual se controlaría el estado de la democracia, el Estado de Derecho y los derechos fundamentales en todos los Estados miembros de acuerdo con un único conjunto de criterios objetivos y de aplicación equitativa, objetiva y justa a todos los Estados de la
Unión.
● El ciclo de seguimiento anual deberá constatar de una fase preliminar de observación del cumplimiento por parte de los Estados Miembros, la redacción de un reporte elaborado por el panel de expertos independientes de la “Comisión de Copenhague”, la publicación del informe anual de la Comisión sobre el seguimiento sobre los valores de la Unión, incluidas recomendaciones, y una fase de seguimiento del informe por parte
de la Comisión, el Consejo y el Parlamento Europeo.
● La redacción anual del informe sobre los valores de la Unión, incorporando en un solo instrumento el Marco del Estado de Derecho de la Comisión, el Diálogo sobre el Estado de Derecho del Consejo y el reporte de Anticorrupción y el instrumento de Monitoreo sobre el Pluralismo de medios.
● Las conclusiones del informe deberán servir como base para que en caso que el Estado miembro en el que se detecte una violación seria o persistente o un riesgo claro de los valores de la UE esté sujeto a sanciones, incluida la suspensión de pagos, la reducción
de la financiación y la prohibición de celebrar nuevos compromisos.
Lo que necesitamos es un mecanismo permanente y jurídicamente vinculante que, en primer lugar, evite duplicidades y haga más eficaces los instrumentos de Estado de Derecho que tenemos; en segundo lugar, que garantice que el cumplimiento por parte de los Estados miembros no solo se revise periódicamente sino que también se aplique y, en tercer lugar, asegurar la participación de la sociedad civil para contribuir a las denuncias de irregularidades
a la salvaguardia del Estado de Derecho.

Estas propuestas han sido creadas en el marco del Foro x el Futuro de la Union europea, una inciativa de Equipo Europa

Victoria  • 25 September 2021

MEJORES PARTIDOS POLÍTICOS EUROPEOS, MÁS DEMOCRACIA

En los últimos años las Familias Políticas del Parlamento Europeo se han visto con profundas dificultades ante las múltiples alertas y avisos para cumplimentar con las condiciones previstas en el Reglamento 1141/2014 sobre el Estatuto y Financiación de los Partidos Políticos Europeos y las Fundaciones Políticas Europeas, enmendado por el Reglamento 2018/673. En particular, con lo dispuesto por el artículo 3.1. c) del Reglamento que obliga a las Familias Políticas observar el cumplimiento de lo dispuesto en el artículo 2 del TUE, a saber, los valores del respeto de la dignidad humana, la libertad, la democracia, la igualdad, el estado de derecho y el respeto de los derechos humanos, incluidos los derechos de las personas pertenecientes a minorías. Asimismo, la “Autoridad para los partidos políticos europeos y las fundaciones políticas europeas” creada bajo el Reglamento 1141/2014 tampoco ha sido capaz de verificar periódicamente que las condiciones para el “registro”, incluida la condición de la observancia continua de los valores básicos de la UE, se cumplan.
El 19 de octubre del 2020, la presidenta de la Comisión Europea Ursula von der Leyen presentó su intención de revisar el Reglamento y establecer reglas más claras sobre la financiación de
los partidos políticos europeos. Por ello, en el marco del Plan de Acción la Democracia Europea, la Comisión propondrá una revisión de la legislación sobre la financiación para fortalecer los vínculos entre la financiación europea y las campañas nacionales y facilitar la
auditoría y la auditoría.

En marco de la revisión del Reglamento 1141/2014 de cara a su aplicación en las próximas elecciones al Parlamento Europeo es necesario que se contemple los mecanismos para casos que no se tomen acciones suficientes en contra del partido nacional que viola el Estado de Derecho u otro valor fundamental de la Unión Europea. En el presente, la cancelación del registro sólo es posible cuando toda la familia política (no solo el partido) cesa en el cumplimiento de los criterios establecidos para la registración de una Familia Europea, incluida el respeto al Estado de Derecho. Asimismo, el procedimiento puede comenzar solo por iniciativa de la Comisión, el Consejo, el Parlamento Europeo (al menos una cuarta parte de
todos los miembros, que representan al menos a tres grupos políticos) y ciudadanos. Por ello es imprescindible que las enmiendas propuestas por la Comisión contemplen no sólo fortalecer el rol de la “Autoridad” (Art.6(2) y Art. 10) para mantenerse independiente del control político que debe monitorear sino también facilitar el régimen de sanciones financieras (Art. 27) cuando dicha familia política, partido europeo o fundación haya sido declarada, por la Autoridad, incumplidora de forma sistemática los valores en el artículo 2 del TUE. El hecho de que la Autoridad deba solicitar su opinión a un comité de seis “personas eminentes independientes'', y que el Parlamento Europeo y el Consejo posean el derecho a objetar si la Autoridad finalmente decide dar de baja a un partido europeo, aumenta aún más la incapacidad de la Autoridad para desplegar sanciones de una manera ante el Partido Político Europeo.
El compromiso con el valor fundamental de la democracia y el Estado de Derecho implica, como mínimo, que los partidos políticos no fomenten, toleren o aprueben los intentos de socavar los principios y valores de la Unión. Los Partidos Políticos Europeos deben desempeñar un papel importante en la defensa del Estado de Derecho y deben contribuir a mejorar el cumplimiento de los valores de la UE en las instituciones europeas.

Estas propuestas han sido creadas en el marco del Foro x el Futuro de la Union europea, una inciativa de Equipo Europa

Victoria  • 25 September 2021

CLÁUSULA DE DEMOCRACIA: EL ESTADO DE DERECHO EN LA ACCIÓN EXTERIOR

Con el objetivo de canalizar el deseo del cumplimiento y respeto de los valores democráticos y de los derechos humanos, desde la firma del Acuerdo de Lomé IV con los países del grupo Asia, Caribe y Pacífico (ACP) se incluye una cláusula de democracia y derechos humanos, a través de la cual una de las partes puede adoptar medidas si se demuestran vulneraciones graves y sistemáticas a la democracia o a los derechos humanos. Sin embargo, la Unión Europea ha carecido de capacidad objetiva e igualitaria a la hora de
analizar las posibles violaciones y ejecutar la cláusula, por lo que este tipo de condición tiene un mero carácter nominal y no se refleja en la realidad del condicionamiento. En estos tipos de
acuerdo no existe un mecanismo fijo de control y supervisión de la cláusula de democracia y de derechos humanos que permita el cumplimiento real de los estipulado y acordado. La carencia de un control sistemático de la cláusula tiene distintas implicaciones. En primer lugar, la condicionalidad del acuerdo no se estaría ejecutando. En segundo lugar, la Unión Europea debe mantener una coherencia entre los valores derivados de la democracia y el
respeto al Estado de Derecho que asume internamente y los que pretende proyectar de forma activa en el exterior. Si no existe un control exhaustivo de los valores a través de los cuales
condiciona sus relaciones con terceros Estados, se estaría produciendo una ruptura de dicha coherencia. Por último, la Unión perdería credibilidad internacional.

En este sentido, consideramos necesario introducir nuevos mecanismos de control de la cláusula de democracia y derechos humanos, que tendrían como objetivo principal el examen de la condicionalidad de los acuerdos de la Unión Europea en cuanto a la democracia y derechos fundamentales y, en última instancia, observar la calidad democrática de las relaciones de la Unión con terceros Estados. Tanto el Parlamento Europeo como la Comisión Europea deben ser partícipes del control de esta cláusula. En este sentido, el marco de supervisión de la cláusula de democracia y
derechos humanos quedaría vertebrado en dos fases distintas:
1) Actuación de las instituciones de la Unión Europea. En el núcleo de esta fase se encontrará el Parlamento Europeo, ya que esta institución es uno de los mayores garantes y defensores de los derechos humanos. En esta fase hay tres vías distintas que
podrán ser simultáneas:
a) La subcomisión de Derechos Humanos del Parlamento Europeo (DROI) será la encargada de supervisar la cláusula. Podrá constatar una violación de los derechos humanos y de los valores democráticos en un tercer Estado socio. La constatación de dicha violación se determinará por mayoría de los votos emitidos por los miembros del Parlamento, quienes emitirán una resolución explicando y motivando dicha constatación. Se informará a la Comisión Europea y al Consejo de la Unión Europea.

b) La Comisión elaborará informes anuales55 sobre el estado de la calidad democrática y sobre el cumplimiento de la cláusula en los acuerdos internacionales que se debatirá en el seno del Parlamento Europeo, que, por mayoría de los votos emitidos, podrá adoptar una resolución en base al informe de la Comisión.

c) El Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior podrá, a través de sus delegaciones internacionales, informar de una violación de los derechos humanos tanto a la Comisión Europea como al Parlamento Europeo, conservando la prudencia para no quebrar la confianza y la neutralidad con el Estado acreditante. El Servicio
Europeo de Acción Exterior ayudará en la tarea de recopilación de información a ambas instituciones.

2) Se crearán subcomisiones de derechos humanos permanentes en los Consejos de Asociación creados a través de los acuerdos internacionales que permitan la supervisión directa sobre la cláusula. Dicha subcomisión estará obligada a estudiar las resoluciones adoptadas por el Parlamento Europeo sobre la constatación de violaciones. El Consejo de Asociación abrirá un diálogo sobre la cuestión pertinente y propondrá medidas para
la mejora de la situación, incluyendo acciones positivas. La subcomisión de derechos humanos de los Consejos de Asociación deberá, asimismo, estudiar peticiones de la sociedad civil y de organizaciones no gubernamentales ante presuntas violaciones, con el objetivo de que la sociedad juegue un mayor papel a la hora de supervisar la aplicación de los acuerdos.

Estas propuestas han sido creadas en el marco del Foro x el Futuro de la Union europea, una inciativa de Equipo Europa

Victoria  • 25 September 2021

PROMOVER UNA POLÍTICA DE VECINDAD MÁS DEMOCRÁTICA

Somos conscientes de que la financiación exterior de la Unión son un conjunto complejo de instrumentos para apoyar y reforzar su acción en la esfera internacional y que su complejidad se coordina mediante el Reglamento sobre las normas comunes60. Vistas las dificultades de la Comisión al evaluar el cumplimiento de los objetivos61, así como la necesidad de una PEV más estratégica, en consonancia con las políticas de la Unión y alejadas de intereses cortoplacistas o nacionales, sin dejar fuera a las organizaciones de la sociedad civil, que deben ser el eje vertical a la hora de definir los planes de acción; específica, proyectos claros y bien definidos;
flexible, adecuar los objetivos a las necesidades concretas de la población y tener en cuenta las realidades sociales de las personas afectadas; y coherente, teniendo presente las realidades existentes sobre el terreno. Destacamos la importancia de la sociedad civil y organizaciones como base a la hora de elaborar los informes que permitirán en un futuro iniciar proyectos e inversiones.

Con el fin de mejorar la implementación de los fondos europeos para el período 2021-2027 y aprovechar el nuevo instrumento de financiación de la acción exterior de la UE para la cooperación internacional y el desarrollo, es preciso elaborar:

1) Proceder a una valoración más concreta e individualizada de cada zona como consecuencia de la participación de la sociedad civil. No deben abarcar varias regiones dispares entre sí, en la medida de lo posible, ya que nos alejaría del objetivo primordial,
conocer las peculiaridades y necesidades reales.
2) Que la participación de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil en la recopilación de datos de los informes sea primordial a la hora de evaluar las propuestas. Esto ayudaría a la visibilizar la política de financiación exterior de la Unión en los lugares donde se
actúe.
3) El Parlamento Europeo debe ejercer el “control parlamentario” sobre los informes regionales. Teniendo presentes el apoyo y fomento de la democracia y los derechos humanos en terceros países, así como la protección de los defensores de los derechos
humanos, con independencia de las interferencias de las autoridades de terceros países.
4) La Comisión y el SEAE deben protagonizar la adición de estos valores, otorgando mayor importancia a la sociedad civil en el desarrollo de los informes para su posterior control por el PE (cumpliendo objetivos de transparencia, rendición de cuentas,
eficiencia, coherencia y la flexibilidad). Estos informes de monitoreo ya presentes se valen de las infraestructuras, cooperaciones y ligámenes ya existentes, con el objeto de no duplicar esfuerzos que retrasen el procedimiento.

Este despliegue de documentos persigue únicamente la eficacia de la PEV en su proyecto inicial, aprovechando las vicisitudes de la pandemia como impulso. Y destacando el papel de la sociedad civil, como columna vertebral del cambio progresivo (respaldo a estados de dudosa vertiente democrática). En definitiva, establecer con cada socio una verdadera relación de partenariado mutuamente aceptable y adaptada a sus realidades y ambiciones particulares.

Estas propuestas han sido creadas en el marco del Foro x el Futuro de la Union europea, una iniciativa de Equipo Europa

Victoria  • 25 September 2021

FRONTEX, HACIA UN MAYOR CONTROL EXTERNO

El nuevo reglamento sobre el funcionamiento de Frontex65, aprobado en noviembre de 2019, viene a incorporar nuevos elementos de control que refuerzan la supervisión de los derechos
fundamentales en las actuaciones de la Agencia. Sin duda, aplaudimos las nuevas medidas propuestas en el reglamento, lo que denota el interés de las instituciones y de la propia Agencia
por garantizar un mayor esfuerzo en vigilar el cumplimiento de los derechos fundamentales. No obstante, consideramos que se puede hacer más en cuanto al control externo. El modelo de elección del agente de derechos humanos no es del todo independiente ya que es el consejo de administración de la agencia quien lo elige. Igualmente, la composición del Foro es elegida por el consejo de administración, previa consulta al director. Creemos que se podría garantizar más la independencia de estos puestos.

Asimismo, el mecanismo de denuncias dispuesto en el artículo 11 del reglamento carece de imparcialidad completa, puesto que se trata de un trámite llevado a cabo dentro de la propia Agencia.

Por lo tanto, la falta de independencia en la supervisión y elección de los puestos más relevantes en materia de derechos humanos implicaría que se pudieran dar casos de ineficacia en el seno de la Agencia, lo que, a su vez, dañaría la imagen de la Agencia y de la Unión Europea en general, como potencia garante del Estado de Derecho y de los derechos fundamentales, incluido la dignidad de los migrantes y de los ciudadanos de terceros Estados.

Invitamos a las instituciones pertinentes que, en una revisión del Reglamento, proponga que, en cuanto al modelo de elección del agente de derechos fundamentales, el candidato propuesto
por el consejo de administración, previa consulta al Foro consultivo deba obtener la aprobación del Parlamento Europeo por mayoría simple de los votos emitidos, para, de este modo, garantizar una elección equilibrada institucionalmente y que pueda obtener el visto bueno de una institución externa, de forma que sea lo más independiente posible. El candidato designado tendría que pasar por una audiencia ante la Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior (LIBE), previo a la votación final. El mismo procedimiento se adoptará para la elección del agente adjunto.

Además, el agente de derechos fundamentales tendrá competencia para obtener información directa de la Agencia de Derechos Humanos (FRA) y redactará, junto con los observadores, un informe anual sobre la aplicación de los derechos fundamentales en Frontex, que se dirigirá al Parlamento Europeo y a la Comisión Europea y que tendrá que estar disponible al público, para
garantizar la supervisión de la opinión pública y la transparencia.

El Parlamento Europeo deberá debatir el contenido de dicho informe anual, así como el Informe Anual de actividades de Frontex. Tras los debates, se publicarán resoluciones que conlleven la
evaluación de las actividades realizadas.

Igualmente, el Parlamento Europeo organizará en su Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior un grupo de trabajo permanente que supervise las actividades del agente y de los observadores. La Comisión LIBE podrá llamar al agente de derechos fundamentales para que dé explicaciones sobre determinados asuntos. De esta forma, se afianzaría la supervisión externa de las actividades de la Agencia, pudiendo aumentar la rapidez y la eficacia a la hora de tomar medidas y buscar soluciones al respecto.

Por último, proponemos que el mecanismo de denuncia incluya una investigación directa y paralela a la actual por parte de la Defensora del Pueblo Europeo (EU Ombudsman).

En conclusión, creemos que apostando por reforzar la imparcialidad y el control de Frontex, ayudará a la propia agencia en su buena disposición y trabajo.

Estas propuestas han sido creadas en el marco del Foro x el Futuro de la Union europea, una inciativa de Equipo Europa

Tatia Turazashvili (Young European Ambassador)  • 25 September 2021

When we refer to fundamental human rights, we should not forget the situation that exists in the labor market in this regard. One of the main problems is the discriminative approach of employers at the job announcement stage. Hence, it will be better if some special guidelines are developed and they are implemented by the employers in the workplace. These guidelines will provide a better understanding of what steps are taken to ensure receiving applications from significantly under‐represented groups –women, particular ethnic groups, also if personal nature questions for example, about marital status, family responsibilities, pregnancy, or sexual orientation are avoided during the pre-contractual stage and if the announcement is based on objective criteria and transparency. This will help to better protect human rights in the labor law sector.

Bohdana  • 25 September 2021

The EU countries should not support the Nord Stream 2 or have a friendly relationship with Russia, an aggressor country that breaks interantional laws and violates human rights in Crimea on a daily basis. If the EU condemns Russia's actions, then it should be clear without any contradictions on the side. Take a stronger stance since this is a security danger of the highest priority. The situation might get out of control otherwise.

Wake
 • 26 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

My idea is to create an LGBT rights law applicable to whole Europe, in which all parts of the community are fully respected and their rights respected.

Gavrus Tiberiu  • 26 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Mandatory regulation (with the imposition of sanctions) that managers of state entities receiving public money are required to post regularly (maximum weekly) and detailing all the expenses of the entity they manage. Both expenditure on purchases of goods, services, investments and own staff. The public money is spent in detail and in full from the OFFICIU and not on request to all citizens on the site of each State entity.

Adrian  • 28 September 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

We too, people with disabilities, representatives in state institutions and the European Parliament. We are too marginalised.

Youness  • 29 September 2021

Freedom, Equality, Fraternity

Oraseanu Daniel  • 29 September 2021

Legalize drugs - take Portugal example and see what happened there. They had a huge drug problem and legalized them - problem got solved. How? see alcohol prohibition: if you restrict it, people will consume the strongest flavor of it(whiskey). If you legalize it they will take it easy (beer). Same with drugs. Also children will not have access to them any more because they will be sold in shops and underground networks will fall due to the legal competition.

Bogdán Rebeka  • 29 September 2021

The government must remove the "the mother is a woman, the father is a man" and the "child rearing is based on christian culture" part from Hungary's constitution, as it discriminates a large number of people.

Anonymus Person  • 29 September 2021

I guess this is not an idea but I wanted to share this. A lot of people in the country I live in are extremely homophobic. I belong to the LGBTQA+ community but it took me years to come out to my parents and they're the only ones that know, not counting my Social Media profile no one from my life knows about. I don't feel safe here and I plan to move out as soon as I'm able to. I'm not the only one, so if this country doesn't want it's almost entire youth to move abroad, the government needs to do something quick. I have experienced mental abuse coming from people my age AND from the people of power towards the LGBTQA+ community. It's homophobic therefore harmful and makes me feel worthless. Maybe change our Minister of Education, which is clearly NOT well educated? I don't think it'll change much though.

Thank you for reading my rambling.

Philippe Beraud  • 29 September 2021

Spiritual virtues should be taught and understood as the underlying core for a healthy society. Compassion, equality, justice, kindness, generosity etc are not just words, they're essential to living together in peace and equity. It is not limited to families to teach them and to live by them.
I wish we would see bilboards claiming Be Kind Today! rather than selling whichever produt we don't need...

Salome Abramishvili (Young European Ambassador)  • 29 September 2021

Despite steps forward, achieving gender equality in politics, the economy, and social life still remain one of the most serious human rights challenges in Georgia. As a result of the 2016 parliamentary and 2017 local elections, the number of women parliamentarians in Georgia is only 15%, the representation of women in local councils is less than 14%, and only one of the 64 elected mayors is a woman. The gender pay gap in Georgia accounts for 35%, the statistics of gender-based violence are also alarming. Georgian women would be grateful if the EU gave more support to Georgia in achieving gender equality. Effective steps need to be taken to promote women's political participation. The legal status of LGBT people should also be improved. Women need to be empowered economically, especially IDPs, women affected by the conflict, and women living in rural areas.

Laimis  • 29 September 2021

In schools don't teach about LGBT but in highschool add discussion lessons about gender and race stereotypes.

Anna Japaridze (Young European Ambassador)  • 29 September 2021

I hope that the future of Europe will be more diverse, progressive and tolerant. I hope that the future of Europe will have all the frameworks that limit us broken. I hope all individuals will be defined by their personal skills, abilities, education, experience and not by their sexual orientation, cultural or social backgrounds, religion or gender. I hope that in the whole of Europe diversity and dissimilarity will be more respected and appreciated for the future.

Nino Bochoidze (Young European Ambassador)  • 30 September 2021

Nowadays, Cybersecurity is a very crucial issue and needs to be one of the main priorities for the countries national security. In my country, Georgia, I would like to have a strong cyber defense system that's why I have a will to invite the professionals from the EU member states in order to share their experience in the field of cybersecurity and help us to build a safe and strong system to handle the threat coming from Russia.

Nino Bochoidze (Young European Ambassador)  • 30 September 2021

We need a group, "Corrupt Hunters" complected with experienced professionals, also researchers, and experts in the field of corruption and good governance. They will be watchdogs not only for the EU member states, but also for the EaP countries.

Andrei David  • 30 September 2021

It is clear that not all EU countries are as tolerant, as diverse, or as friendly towards other citizens. The EU must implement stricter laws against discrimination across the whole continent, so no matter where you go in Europe, you will know that you are protected by the same laws. These laws should be applied to the population, the authorities, and to any civil servant. I consider the Police to take part in the big problem, as many times they are using their powers in the wrong and illegal way and they must be accused of abuse. It is a shame every time this happens and it is clear that the EU countries do not cooperate in this aspect as the Police are independent in each country. I propose a unique Police body that will have power across all countries and will make sure that no one is left behind.

Karol  • 01 October 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Introduce legal protection of human life from conception to natural death.

Adrian  • 01 October 2021

As a Romanian national, I think that the corruption cases that end up in court are just the tip of the iceberg. Corruption and abuse of power from public officials are a daily presence in Romania. There needs to be a WORKING system that allows citizens to report corruption and abuse, and those reported should not investigate themselves. This idea is for EU institutions, since we cannot count on national authorities to fix something which is a 'feature' of Romanian politics, but a problem for the Romanian people and the way the country is perceived externally.

Adrian  • 01 October 2021

Make nepotism in public institutions against the law. It may seem disproportionate, but in countries like Romania there are plenty institutions that are run by an extended list of family members. This is a very present source of corruption. This idea is for EU institutions, since we cannot count on national authorities to fix something which is a 'feature' of Romanian politics, but a problem for the Romanian people and the way the country is perceived externally.

Carolina Pia Barros Dias de Figueiredo  • 02 October 2021

More close proximity with EU citizens. A more easy way for citizens to be able to get access to justice would be to deburocratize the access to European Court of Justice and Human Rights.

Sofia Amigoni  • 03 October 2021

I can't understand how soem people can't marry the person they love just because they are both women or men. I don't care who my friends are going to marry, I just want them to be happy.

Antonio Prokscha  • 04 October 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

EU citizens must have the right to be offered only those goods and services that are produced and provided in accordance with universal human rights.

LYMEC  • 04 October 2021

LYMEC's vision on political priorities - Promoting our European Values

Promoting our European Values:
• The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.
• The European Union should take steps in order to prevent all forms of discrimination and consolidate an area of diversity, freedom, security and justice.
• The powers of the European Union in the field of human rights need to be increased, and its ability to enforce them to be bolstered. We call for the human rights perspective to be an imperative part of future free-trade agreements.
• Any European country applying to become a full member of the European Union needs to respect the principles of liberty, democracy and rule of law, as well as protect and preserve human rights and fundamental freedoms. Negotiations with partnership countries not respecting these European values should be frozen until they show real commitment to respect and adhere to our norms and principles.
• Economic sanctions against regimes and persons, including targeted trade restrictions to countries not respecting human rights and the rule of law is an important tool for the EU that should be applied with careful analysis so as not to wrongfully hurt societies.

LYMEC  • 04 October 2021

LYMEC's vision on political priorities - Promoting our European Values

Promoting our European Values:
• The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.
• The European Union should take steps in order to prevent all forms of discrimination and consolidate an area of diversity, freedom, security and justice.
• The powers of the European Union in the field of human rights need to be increased, and its ability to enforce them to be bolstered. We call for the human rights perspective to be an imperative part of future free-trade agreements.
• Any European country applying to become a full member of the European Union needs to respect the principles of liberty, democracy and rule of law, as well as protect and preserve human rights and fundamental freedoms. Negotiations with partnership countries not respecting these European values should be frozen until they show real commitment to respect and adhere to our norms and principles.
• Economic sanctions against regimes and persons, including targeted trade restrictions to countries not respecting human rights and the rule of law is an important tool for the EU that should be applied with careful analysis so as not to wrongfully hurt societies.

Patricio Centeno
 • 04 October 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

THE DIGITAL GREEN PASSPORT: A DOOR TO NORMALITY AND CYBER CRIMES

INTRODUCTION
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the vulnerability of the health sector as a target of cyber-attacks. In 2020, data breaches in this sector increased by 55 % to a total cost of USD 13.2 billion. This
this is due to low investment in cybersecurity despite the strong reliance of health on new technologies, in combination with the shooting of the amount and types of stored data and connected devices. In addition to health information, which includes those identifying the person and those relating to his or her state of health (such as PCR tests), it is important to protect R & D information (especially patents, in this case vaccines).

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM
The threats facing the health sector include malware, ransomware, vulnerability in cloud storage, misleading pages, phishing, encryption problems, human error, among others. An attack not only exposes patients’ personal data but also endangers the infrastructure
health, making emergency response impossible, but it also reduces public trust in the public health system and as a result has an impact beyond the sector.

Many of these risks have already been identified by ENISA, which has intensified its work in the area in the wake of the pandemic. In this respect, the Cyber Europe 2020 exercise was dedicated to the health sector but due to the circumstances it has not yet been carried out. In the meantime, ENISA has published the report "Cloud security for healthcare
services “, and the “Hospital Supply Guidelines” and, on the other hand, has organised a conference on “eHealth Security”.

However, as these are non-binding recommendations and not backed by a specific budget, they suffer from significantly reduced effectiveness. This has been demonstrated by tracing apps developed by each EU country, which lacked data portability capabilities and cross-platform compatibility. Therefore, especially with a view to the Digital Green Certificate, it is essential to increase both the efficiency and technical security of digital tools and their acceptance by citizens.

PROPOSAL
Taking into account the problem described above, this working group puts forward a proposal that seeks to solve two of the pressing problems regarding the “Green Passport” and the handling of health data at digital level.

We propose that the European Commission, directly or indirectly through one of its agencies (such as the European Health and Digital Executive Agency (HaDEA) proposal), create a fundamental and common European structure for a digital platform (now known as the Green Passport). The need to create this unified platform to
EU level is urgent to avoid segregation of vaccination control systems and test results (COVID in this case) in different Member States and regions, as was the case with tracing apps at the end of summer 2020.

We propose that this platform developed by EU bodies should serve as a basis for Member States to develop improvements and adapt technological development to the needs of each geography. As the structure will be unique, security development protocols will be able to benefit from a broader and more diverse expert group that will provide greater security and privacy for users of such systems.

Secondly, we suggest that this development incorporates a single database compiling laboratories that are registered with the various national bodies and are empowered to issue test results (such as PCR). This proposal aims to ensure that the results issued by test centres are trusted and comply with national regulations (which in turn comply with EU rules). The objectives of this are to: (1) falsification of information on test results is minimised; (2) increase transparency and cooperation between laboratories across the EU; and (3) tools are provided for the correct handling of personal data when issuing health test results (currently mainly COVID-19, but not excluding the possibility to incorporate in the future results of other virus tests such as HPV or HIV).

Patricio Centeno  • 04 October 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

DIGITAL GREEN PASSPORT: A MANAGEMENT TO NORMALITY AND cyber crimes

INTRODUCTION
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the vulnerability of the health sector as a target for cyber-attacks. In 2020 data breaches in this sector increased by 55 % to a total cost of USD 13.2 billion. This
is due to low investment in cybersecurity despite the strong reliance of health care on new technologies, combined with the shooting of the amount and types of data stored and connected devices. In addition to health information, which includes those identifying the person and those relating to his or her state of health (such as PCR tests), it is important to protect R & D information (especially patents, in this case vaccines).

Description OF THE PROBLEMA
The threats faced by the health sector include malware, ransomware, vulnerability in cloud storage, misleading pages, phishing, encryption problems, human errors, among others. An attack not only exposes patients’ personal data but also endangers
health infrastructure, making emergency response impossible, but also reduces public confidence in the public health system and as a result has an impact beyond the sector.

Many of these risks have already been identified by ENISA, which has stepped up its work in the area following the pandemic. In this respect, the “Cyber Europe 2020” exercise was dedicated to the health sector but due to the circumstances it has not yet taken place. In the meantime, ENISA has published the report “Cloud security for
healthcare services “, and the Guidelines on Hospital Supply “and, on the other hand, organised a conference on “eHealth Security”.

However, as they are non-binding recommendations not backed by a specific budget, they are significantly less effective. This has been demonstrated by the tracking applications developed by each Member State, which lacked data portability and platform compatibility capabilities. For this reason, especially with regard to the Digital Green Certificate, it is essential to increase both the efficiency and technical security of digital tools and their acceptance by citizens.

Taking into account the issues described above, this working group puts forward a proposal which seeks to solve two of the pressing problems with regard to the “Green Passport” and the handling of health data digitally.

We propose that the European Commission, directly or indirectly through one of its agencies (such as the European Health and Digital Executive Agency (HaDEA) proposal), create a fundamental and common European structure for a digital platform (now known as “Green Passport”). The need to create this unified platform at EU
level is urgent to avoid segregation of vaccination control systems and test results (COVID in this case) in different Member States and regions, as was the case for tracking applications in late summer 2020.

We propose that this platform developed by EU bodies should function as a basis for Member States to develop improvements and adapt technological development to the needs of each geography. As the structure will be unique, security development protocols can benefit from a broader and more diverse expert group that will provide greater security and privacy for the users of such systems.

Secondly, we suggest that this development should incorporate a single database compiling the laboratories that are registered with the various national bodies and are empowered to issue results of certain tests (such as the PCR). The aim of this proposal is to ensure that the results issued by test centres are reliable and comply with national regulations (which in turn comply with EU rules). The objectives of this are to: (1) the falsification of information from test results is minimised; (2) increase transparency and inter-laboratory cooperation across the EU; And (3) tools are provided for the correct handling of personal data when issuing health test results (currently mainly COVID-19, but not excluding the inclusion in the future of results of other virus tests such as HPV or HIV).

Skevi  • 07 October 2021

So many people in some European countries are deprived of the right to marry whoever they want to or to start a family with the person they love just because they have the same gender. This can cause marginalization for some people or even isolation from the society. Marriage and adoption should be legal in all the countries of Europe as everyone should have the simple right to be themselves and love who ever they choose.

Response to Skevi by George  • 08 October 2021

Sodom and Gomorrah were completely destroyed due to their progressive homosexual aggression upon everyone..

Emmanuel  • 08 October 2021

We need to create more space where people are in contact (preparing food, administration task, activities in the city) with people called nowadays ''migrants''. This will hopefully help at least to have an overview and understand their challenges.

Aiantas Christofidis  • 08 October 2021

"Your Rights End Where the Rights of Others Begin"

The crisis that our societies are going through regarding the rights of the LGBTQ+ people could be eased if those who infringe queer people's rights remembered this simple phrase.

The rights of this community is still heavily debatable and a taboo topic despite that it is the rights of a certain group of people we are talking about.

The expressing of your opinion should not limit the rights of other people. We have the right to express our opinion, in a manner that doesn't breach the freedom of humans ( and not exclusive to).

Aarón Guerra  • 08 October 2021

LGBTQI FREEDOM ZONE - LGBTQI FAMILIES EQUAL UNDER EU CIVIL LAW

Although the obligation of all EU member states to recognize same-sex marriages, civil unions and same-sex non-registered partnerships for providing residence permits to 3rd country nationals who are family members of an EU citizen has been a huge step towards the achievement of equal treatment of same-sex couples under the freedom of movement, there is still much more to do. This obligation cannot finish when residence permits are issued and 3rd country nationals who are members of the family of an EU citizen can legally reside with us here. We need legal security for our families in all aspects of our civil life when moving to another EU state, regardless of which one. For example: keeping our economic regime when married, inheritance rights in all cases, recognition of our children, rights to visit at the hospital when hospitalized or sick... and a large etc that is not always recognized in each of the EU member states. But also, EU LGBTQI citizens must have the same rights under civil law, disregarding where they live or which EU member state they come from.

Because of this, it is urgent to issue an EU regulation comprehending our reality, so that we really enjoy the same rights as heterosexual couples do across the whole European Union. Staying in our countries or exercising our freedom of movement recognized by the EU law. The disparities amongst the Member States on this matter, make it necessary to harmonize the national regulations in order to really make effective the declaration of the EU as an LGBTQI Freedom Zone.

Zah Ioan
 • 09 October 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

In all EU countries, life imprisonment should be imposed for rape of women (regardless of age), and for human trafficking, both for those who injure them and for their associates. For dreams, there should be no possibility of leaving earlier.

TESS Marembert-Llamas
 • 09 October 2021
This is an automated translation. ()

Promote culture among young people.
Donations of books, films.
Pass for visits to museums and monuments.

Any thoughts on this idea?

No votes have been submitted yet.