On
31 may 2011 we decided to
support
EDRi's
request to the Parliament "that all relevant documents
(drafts distributed by the European Commission and associated
briefing notes from the Commission) received by the Parliament
be published and/or communicated directly to us as soon as
possible."
On
7 February 2012 Dany and Rebecca did
alert
the President of the European Parliament of complaints to the
Ombudsman regarding access to ACTA-related documents (see
our campaign wiki for reference
http://act-on-acta.eu/).
But the Parliament refused access, and EDRi consequently pursued
its Ombudsman complaint further.
The Ombudsman has now published it's conclusion with regards to
EDRi's complaint:
There has been no maladministration by
Parliament.
But the Ombudsman also added a "Further remark" which should
urgently inform the current debate on transparency in the TTIP
negotiations:
Given that Parliament's application of
Regulation 1049/2001 is affected by commitments such as the
one entered into by the Commission in this case, Parliament,
as a political body, could intervene with the Commission and
the Council with a view to ensuring that, in future, the
very nature of Parliament, which is openly to deliberate on
such issues, is not undermined.
Link:
http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cases/decision.faces/en/50947/html.bookmark
It is clear from the complaint itself and the Ombudsman's
further remark that if the TTIP negotiation framework is not
radically improved with regards to present,
and future,
public access to documents, there is a serious risk that the
very nature of Parliament will be undermined.
As
I see it, there are few realistic alternatives than to make
Predecisional/Deliberative Drafts available to the public
between every negotiation round.
That's the bitter lesson learnt from EDRi's ACTA complaint.
Best regards.
//Erik
On 06/09/2013 07:36 PM, JOSEFSSON Erik wrote: