2001/0115(COD)

Fight against fraud: criminal-law protection of the Community's financial interests

Procedure lapsed or withdrawn

General
Activities
Documents
History

2001/0115(COD) Fight against fraud: criminal-law protection of the Community's financial interests

Role	Committee	Rapporteur
Lead	CONT	THEATO Diemut R. (PPE-DE)
Opinion	JURI	MARINHO Luís (PSE)
Opinion	LIBE	DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe (GUE/NGL)

Lead committee dossier: CONT/5/14818
Legal Basis TFEU TFEU 325-p4

Subjects

8.70.04 Action to combat Community fraud

Links

Activites

2012/10/23 Proposal withdrawn by Commission
2002/10/16 Modified legislative proposal
- OJ C 071 25.03.2003, p. 0001-0002 E
- COM(2002)0577 summary
  
  Of the 20 amendments adopted by the European Parliament, the Commission can accept 4 in full and one in part. Because of the approach it has taken as regards the form and the legal basis of its proposal, the Commission is unable to accept any of the other Parliamentary amendments, which might have more political and legal relevance in some other context. Those accepted include: - the instrument will become an integral part of the Community acquis and will have to be incorporated into the legislation of the candidate countries; - a new recital referring to future developments such as the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor; - custodial sentences available at least in cases involving serious fraud may lead to extradition. Amendments not accepted include: - further details on the definition of "national official"; - additions to the definition of fraud, since they would unduly extend the definition to cover preparatory activities, which are already adequately covered; - clauses on new offences are rejected since they do not correspond to the objective of the directive; - references to OLAF are rejected, for the simple reason that they have on direct link with the purpose of the directive.
- DG {u'url': u'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/olaf/', u'title': u'European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)'}, ŠEMETA Algirdas
2001/11/29 Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
- OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E
- T5-0629/2001 summary
  
  The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected.
2001/11/28 Debate in Parliament
2001/11/06 Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
2001/10/17 Amendments tabled in committee
- PE305.612/AM
2001/09/27 Committee draft report
- PE305.612/REV
2001/07/19 Court of Auditors: opinion, report
- OJ C 349 10.10.2001, p. 0001-0020
- RCC0009/2001 summary
  
  The Court of Auditors was asked for its opinion on the proposed directive. The Court welcomed the initiative and considered that a directive is an appropriate instrument for instituting effective protection of the Community's financial interests. It made the following specific observations: -the current definition of corruption, both active and passive, is too restrictive: on the one hand it does not cover the act on the part of an official of receiving advantages as inducement to carry out a duty that is not in breach of his official duties; on the other, it makes the existence of the offence depend on damage to the Community's financial interests. This condition is not acceptable where Community officials are concerned. -making it a condition of money-laundering that the person committing the act knows the derivation of the property is likely to make it virtually impossible to bring a prosecution for such an offence. -bodies corporate can be held liable for acts of passive corruption as well. The Court refers, for example, to the case of a body corporate carrying out public tasks. -there is no reason for limiting custodial sentences to cases of serious fraud.
2001/06/14 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2001/05/23 Legislative proposal
- OJ C 240 28.08.2001, p. 0125 E
- COM(2001)0272 summary
  
  PURPOSE: to present a Commission proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the criminal-law protection of the Community's financial interests. CONTENT: under Article 280 of the EC Treaty as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Community is reponsible for taking measures for the protection of Community financial interests which afford effective and equivalent protection in all the Member States. The sheer extent of the damage done to Community financial interests by fraud and international economic and finanical crime calls for the current legal arrangements to be given more teeth as a matter of urgency, especially as the Member States have fallen behind schedule in ratifying the convention and protocols of the financial interests (PFI) of the European Communities. The Commission is accordingly proposing this Directive, based on Article 280 of the EC Treaty, which is also motivated by the need to adopt concrete measures to implement its overall strategic approach to combat fraud. The articles in this proposal on the criminal-law protection of the financial interests of the European Communities are without exception based on provisions from the Third Pillar PRI instruments. The main provisions of the proposed directive are the following: - all the provisions from the current protocols on the protection of the European Community's financial interests that do not fall under the restriction referred to in Article 280 of the EC Treaty; - provisions on cooperation with the Commission, since these do not fall under the exception in Article 280(4) of the EC Treaty either; - setting up of an advisory committee involving Member States in regular consultation; - provisions on fraud, active and passive corruption, equal treatment, money laundering, liability and penalties, and finally, cooperation of national authorities.
- DG {u'url': u'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/olaf/', u'title': u'European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)'}, ŠEMETA Algirdas

Documents

Legislative proposal: OJ C 240 28.08.2001, p. 0125 E
Legislative proposal published: COM(2001)0272
Court of Auditors: opinion, report: OJ C 349 10.10.2001, p. 0001-0020
Court of Auditors: opinion, report: RCC0009/2001
Committee draft report: PE305.612/REV
Amendments tabled in committee: PE305.612/AM
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0390/2001
Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0629/2001
Modified legislative proposal: OJ C 071 25.03.2003, p. 0001-0002 E
Modified legislative proposal published: COM(2002)0577

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

2013-02-08

activities/9

added

date: 2012-10-23

body: unknown

type: Proposal withdrawn by Commission

procedure/stage_reached

changed

Old

Awaiting Council 1st reading position / budgetary conciliation convocation

New

Procedure lapsed or withdrawn

2013-02-06

2012-12-01

activities/5/committees	added	body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/5/date	changed	Old 2001-11-29 New 2001-11-06
activities/5/docs/0/title	changed	Old OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E New A5-0390/2001
activities/5/docs/0/type	changed	Old Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading New Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/5/docs/0/url	changed	Old http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2002:153E:SOM:EN:HTML New http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-390&language=EN
activities/5/docs/1	deleted	url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P5-TA-2001-629 text The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected. type Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title T5-0629/2001
activities/5/text	added	The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights.
activities/5/type	changed	Old Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading New Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/6	deleted	body EP date 2001-10-18 type Deadline Amendments
activities/7	deleted	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/7/date	changed	Old 2001-05-30 New 2001-11-29
activities/7/docs	added	url http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2002:153E:SOM:EN:HTML type Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P5-TA-2001-629 text The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected. type Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title T5-0629/2001
activities/7/type	changed	Old EP officialisation New Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading

2012-11-15

2012-09-21

2012-09-19

2012-04-12

2012-04-09

activities/6/docs/0/url	added	http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-390&language=EN
activities/9/docs/0/celexid	deleted	CELEX:52002PC0577:EN
activities/9/docs/0/text	deleted	Of the 20 amendments adopted by the European Parliament, the Commission can accept 4 in full and one in part. Because of the approach it has taken as regards the form and the legal basis of its proposal, the Commission is unable to accept any of the other Parliamentary amendments, which might have more political and legal relevance in some other context. Those accepted include: - the instrument will become an integral part of the Community acquis and will have to be incorporated into the legislation of the candidate countries; - a new recital referring to future developments such as the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor; - custodial sentences available at least in cases involving serious fraud may lead to extradition. Amendments not accepted include: - further details on the definition of "national official"; - additions to the definition of fraud, since they would unduly extend the definition to cover preparatory activities, which are already adequately covered; - clauses on new offences are rejected since they do not correspond to the objective of the directive; - references to OLAF are rejected, for the simple reason that they have on direct link with the purpose of the directive.
activities/9/docs/0/title	changed	Old COM(2002)0577 New OJ C 071 25.03.2003, p. 0001-0002 E
activities/9/docs/0/type	changed	Old Modified legislative proposal published New Modified legislative proposal
activities/9/docs/1/type	changed	Old Modified legislative proposal New Modified legislative proposal published
activities/9/docs/1/url	added	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2002&nu_doc=577

2012-04-08

2012-04-07

activities/0/docs/0/celexid	deleted	CELEX:52001PC0272:EN
activities/0/docs/0/text	deleted	PURPOSE: to present a Commission proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the criminal-law protection of the Community's financial interests. CONTENT: under Article 280 of the EC Treaty as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Community is reponsible for taking measures for the protection of Community financial interests which afford effective and equivalent protection in all the Member States. The sheer extent of the damage done to Community financial interests by fraud and international economic and finanical crime calls for the current legal arrangements to be given more teeth as a matter of urgency, especially as the Member States have fallen behind schedule in ratifying the convention and protocols of the financial interests (PFI) of the European Communities. The Commission is accordingly proposing this Directive, based on Article 280 of the EC Treaty, which is also motivated by the need to adopt concrete measures to implement its overall strategic approach to combat fraud. The articles in this proposal on the criminal-law protection of the financial interests of the European Communities are without exception based on provisions from the Third Pillar PRI instruments. The main provisions of the proposed directive are the following: - all the provisions from the current protocols on the protection of the European Community's financial interests that do not fall under the restriction referred to in Article 280 of the EC Treaty; - provisions on cooperation with the Commission, since these do not fall under the exception in Article 280(4) of the EC Treaty either; - setting up of an advisory committee involving Member States in regular consultation; - provisions on fraud, active and passive corruption, equal treatment, money laundering, liability and penalties, and finally, cooperation of national authorities.
activities/0/docs/0/title	changed	Old COM(2001)0272 New OJ C 240 28.08.2001, p. 0125 E
activities/0/docs/1/url	added	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2001&nu_doc=272
activities/8/docs/1/text	deleted	The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected.
activities/8/docs/1/title	changed	Old T5-0629/2001 New OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E
activities/8/docs/1/url	added	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2002:153E:SOM:EN:HTML

2012-04-05

activities/3/docs/0/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2001:349:SOM:EN:HTML
activities/6/docs/0/url	deleted	http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-390&language=EN
activities/8/docs/1/text	added	The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected.
activities/8/docs/1/title	changed	Old OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E New T5-0629/2001
activities/8/docs/1/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2002:153E:SOM:EN:HTML
activities/9/docs/0/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2002&nu_doc=577
activities/9/docs/1/celexid	added	CELEX:52002PC0577:EN
activities/9/docs/1/text	added	Of the 20 amendments adopted by the European Parliament, the Commission can accept 4 in full and one in part. Because of the approach it has taken as regards the form and the legal basis of its proposal, the Commission is unable to accept any of the other Parliamentary amendments, which might have more political and legal relevance in some other context. Those accepted include: - the instrument will become an integral part of the Community acquis and will have to be incorporated into the legislation of the candidate countries; - a new recital referring to future developments such as the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor; - custodial sentences available at least in cases involving serious fraud may lead to extradition. Amendments not accepted include: - further details on the definition of "national official"; - additions to the definition of fraud, since they would unduly extend the definition to cover preparatory activities, which are already adequately covered; - clauses on new offences are rejected since they do not correspond to the objective of the directive; - references to OLAF are rejected, for the simple reason that they have on direct link with the purpose of the directive.
activities/9/docs/1/title	changed	Old OJ C 071 25.03.2003, p. 0001-0002 E New COM(2002)0577
links/European Commission	added	url http://ec.europa.eu/prelex/liste_resultats.cfm?CL=en&ReqId=0&DocType=COD&DocYear=2001&DocNum=0115 title PreLex

2012-04-04

activities/3/docs/0/url	added	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2001:349:SOM:EN:HTML
activities/8/docs/1/text	deleted	The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected.
activities/8/docs/1/title	changed	Old T5-0629/2001 New OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E
activities/8/docs/1/url	added	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2002:153E:SOM:EN:HTML
activities/9/docs/0/celexid	deleted	CELEX:52002PC0577:EN
activities/9/docs/0/text	deleted	Of the 20 amendments adopted by the European Parliament, the Commission can accept 4 in full and one in part. Because of the approach it has taken as regards the form and the legal basis of its proposal, the Commission is unable to accept any of the other Parliamentary amendments, which might have more political and legal relevance in some other context. Those accepted include: - the instrument will become an integral part of the Community acquis and will have to be incorporated into the legislation of the candidate countries; - a new recital referring to future developments such as the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor; - custodial sentences available at least in cases involving serious fraud may lead to extradition. Amendments not accepted include: - further details on the definition of "national official"; - additions to the definition of fraud, since they would unduly extend the definition to cover preparatory activities, which are already adequately covered; - clauses on new offences are rejected since they do not correspond to the objective of the directive; - references to OLAF are rejected, for the simple reason that they have on direct link with the purpose of the directive.
activities/9/docs/0/title	changed	Old COM(2002)0577 New OJ C 071 25.03.2003, p. 0001-0002 E
activities/9/docs/0/type	changed	Old Modified legislative proposal published New Modified legislative proposal
activities/9/docs/1/type	changed	Old Modified legislative proposal New Modified legislative proposal published
activities/9/docs/1/url	added	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2002&nu_doc=577

2012-04-04

activities/0/docs/0/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2001&nu_doc=0272
activities/0/docs/1/celexid	added	CELEX:52001PC0272:EN
activities/0/docs/1/text	added	PURPOSE: to present a Commission proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the criminal-law protection of the Community's financial interests. CONTENT: under Article 280 of the EC Treaty as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Community is reponsible for taking measures for the protection of Community financial interests which afford effective and equivalent protection in all the Member States. The sheer extent of the damage done to Community financial interests by fraud and international economic and finanical crime calls for the current legal arrangements to be given more teeth as a matter of urgency, especially as the Member States have fallen behind schedule in ratifying the convention and protocols of the financial interests (PFI) of the European Communities. The Commission is accordingly proposing this Directive, based on Article 280 of the EC Treaty, which is also motivated by the need to adopt concrete measures to implement its overall strategic approach to combat fraud. The articles in this proposal on the criminal-law protection of the financial interests of the European Communities are without exception based on provisions from the Third Pillar PRI instruments. The main provisions of the proposed directive are the following: - all the provisions from the current protocols on the protection of the European Community's financial interests that do not fall under the restriction referred to in Article 280 of the EC Treaty; - provisions on cooperation with the Commission, since these do not fall under the exception in Article 280(4) of the EC Treaty either; - setting up of an advisory committee involving Member States in regular consultation; - provisions on fraud, active and passive corruption, equal treatment, money laundering, liability and penalties, and finally, cooperation of national authorities.
activities/0/docs/1/title	changed	Old OJ C 240 28.08.2001, p. 0125 E New COM(2001)0272
activities/0/docs/1/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2001:240E:SOM:EN:HTML
activities/3	added	date 2001-07-19 docs type Court of Auditors: opinion, report title OJ C 349 10.10.2001, p. 0001-0020 text The Court of Auditors was asked for its opinion on the proposed directive. The Court welcomed the initiative and considered that a directive is an appropriate instrument for instituting effective protection of the Community's financial interests. It made the following specific observations: -the current definition of corruption, both active and passive, is too restrictive: on the one hand it does not cover the act on the part of an official of receiving advantages as inducement to carry out a duty that is not in breach of his official duties; on the other, it makes the existence of the offence depend on damage to the Community's financial interests. This condition is not acceptable where Community officials are concerned. -making it a condition of money-laundering that the person committing the act knows the derivation of the property is likely to make it virtually impossible to bring a prosecution for such an offence. -bodies corporate can be held liable for acts of passive corruption as well. The Court refers, for example, to the case of a body corporate carrying out public tasks. -there is no reason for limiting custodial sentences to cases of serious fraud. title RCC0009/2001 type Court of Auditors: opinion, report celexid CELEX:52001AA0009:EN body CoA type Court of Auditors: opinion, report
activities/6/docs/0/url	changed	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN New http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-390&language=EN
activities/8/docs/0/url	deleted	http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P5-TA-2001-0629
activities/8/docs/1/text	added	The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected.
activities/8/docs/1/title	changed	Old OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E New T5-0629/2001
activities/8/docs/1/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2002:153E:SOM:EN:HTML
activities/9/docs/0/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2002&nu_doc=0577
activities/9/docs/1/celexid	added	CELEX:52002PC0577:EN
activities/9/docs/1/text	added	Of the 20 amendments adopted by the European Parliament, the Commission can accept 4 in full and one in part. Because of the approach it has taken as regards the form and the legal basis of its proposal, the Commission is unable to accept any of the other Parliamentary amendments, which might have more political and legal relevance in some other context. Those accepted include: - the instrument will become an integral part of the Community acquis and will have to be incorporated into the legislation of the candidate countries; - a new recital referring to future developments such as the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor; - custodial sentences available at least in cases involving serious fraud may lead to extradition. Amendments not accepted include: - further details on the definition of "national official"; - additions to the definition of fraud, since they would unduly extend the definition to cover preparatory activities, which are already adequately covered; - clauses on new offences are rejected since they do not correspond to the objective of the directive; - references to OLAF are rejected, for the simple reason that they have on direct link with the purpose of the directive.
activities/9/docs/1/title	changed	Old OJ C 071 25.03.2003, p. 0001-0002 E New COM(2002)0577
activities/9/docs/1/url	deleted	http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2003:071E:SOM:EN:HTML
links/European Commission	deleted	url http://ec.europa.eu/prelex/liste_resultats.cfm?CL=en&ReqId=0&DocType=COD&DocYear=2001&DocNum=0115 title PreLex

2012-03-22

2012-03-14

2012-03-02

2012-02-20

2012-02-15

2012-02-12

activities/2	added	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/2	deleted	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/5	added	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/5	deleted	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
committees/0/rapporteur/0	added	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/0/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/1/rapporteur/0	added	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/1/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/2/rapporteur/0	added	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
committees/2/rapporteur/0	deleted	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe

2012-02-12

activities/2	added	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/2	deleted	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/5	added	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/5	deleted	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
committees/0/rapporteur/0	added	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/0/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/1/rapporteur/0	added	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/1/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/2/rapporteur/0	added	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
committees/2/rapporteur/0	deleted	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe

2012-02-11

activities/2	added	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/2	deleted	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/5	added	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/5	deleted	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
committees/0/rapporteur/0	added	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/0/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/1/rapporteur/0	added	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/1/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/2/rapporteur/0	added	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
committees/2/rapporteur/0	deleted	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe

2012-02-10

activities/2	added	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/2	deleted	date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
activities/5	added	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
activities/5	deleted	body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
committees/0/rapporteur/0	added	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/0/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R.
committees/1/rapporteur/0	added	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/1/rapporteur/0	deleted	group PSE name MARINHO Luís
committees/2/rapporteur/0	added	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
committees/2/rapporteur/0	deleted	group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe

2012-02-09

activities	added	date 2001-05-23 docs url http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2001&nu_doc=0272 text PURPOSE: to present a Commission proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the criminal-law protection of the Community's financial interests. CONTENT: under Article 280 of the EC Treaty as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Community is reponsible for taking measures for the protection of Community financial interests which afford effective and equivalent protection in all the Member States. The sheer extent of the damage done to Community financial interests by fraud and international economic and finanical crime calls for the current legal arrangements to be given more teeth as a matter of urgency, especially as the Member States have fallen behind schedule in ratifying the convention and protocols of the financial interests (PFI) of the European Communities. The Commission is accordingly proposing this Directive, based on Article 280 of the EC Treaty, which is also motivated by the need to adopt concrete measures to implement its overall strategic approach to combat fraud. The articles in this proposal on the criminal-law protection of the financial interests of the European Communities are without exception based on provisions from the Third Pillar PRI instruments. The main provisions of the proposed directive are the following: - all the provisions from the current protocols on the protection of the European Community's financial interests that do not fall under the restriction referred to in Article 280 of the EC Treaty; - provisions on cooperation with the Commission, since these do not fall under the exception in Article 280(4) of the EC Treaty either; - setting up of an advisory committee involving Member States in regular consultation; - provisions on fraud, active and passive corruption, equal treatment, money laundering, liability and penalties, and finally, cooperation of national authorities. celexid CELEX:52001PC0272:EN type Legislative proposal published title COM(2001)0272 url http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2001:240E:SOM:EN:HTML type Legislative proposal title OJ C 240 28.08.2001, p. 0125 E type Legislative proposal body EC commission DG European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) Commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas body EP date 2001-05-30 type EP officialisation date 2001-06-14 body EP type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe date 2001-09-27 docs type Committee draft report title PE305.612/REV body EP type Committee draft report body EP date 2001-10-18 type Deadline Amendments body EP committees body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A5-2001-0390&language=EN type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading title A5-0390/2001 text The committee adopted the report by its chair, Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D) broadly supporting the proposal under the codecision procedure (1st reading), subject to a few amendments. It argued that the protection of the Community's financial interests must be dealt with at Community level, i.e. it should fall within the first pillar as confirmed by the European Council in Nice. In addition, MEPs wanted the proposed directive turned into a regulation, thereby making it binding and directly applicable in the Member States. In view of the complex, cross-border nature of some fraud cases, the committee called for reinforced cooperation between Member States and the EU Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, allowing action taken against a cross-border fraud case to be centralised in one Member State. It also wanted to prevent people presumed guilty of fraud against the financial interests of the EU from enjoying total immunity because of a blanket refusal by some Member States to extradite their nationals. The committee called for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty. It recognised that, until the treaty is amended, the European Public Prosecutor can only investigate members of the EU's institutions and bodies and their officials and other staff. However, it also wanted to ensure that investigations were lawful and legitimate in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. date 2001-11-06 type Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading date 2001-11-28 body EP type Debate in Parliament date 2001-11-29 docs url http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P5-TA-2001-0629 text The European Parliament adopted the resolution by Mr Diemut THEATO (EPP-ED, D). (Please refer to the previous text). It should however be added that an amendment calling for the rapid appointment of an independent European Public Prosecutor on the basis of Article 280 of the EC Treaty was rejected by the Plenary. A subsequent motion to send the report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control was also rejected. type Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title T5-0629/2001 url http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2002:153E:SOM:EN:HTML type Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title OJ C 153 27.06.2002, p. 0032-0253 E body EP type Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading date 2002-10-16 docs url http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2002&nu_doc=0577 text Of the 20 amendments adopted by the European Parliament, the Commission can accept 4 in full and one in part. Because of the approach it has taken as regards the form and the legal basis of its proposal, the Commission is unable to accept any of the other Parliamentary amendments, which might have more political and legal relevance in some other context. Those accepted include: - the instrument will become an integral part of the Community acquis and will have to be incorporated into the legislation of the candidate countries; - a new recital referring to future developments such as the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor; - custodial sentences available at least in cases involving serious fraud may lead to extradition. Amendments not accepted include: - further details on the definition of "national official"; - additions to the definition of fraud, since they would unduly extend the definition to cover preparatory activities, which are already adequately covered; - clauses on new offences are rejected since they do not correspond to the objective of the directive; - references to OLAF are rejected, for the simple reason that they have on direct link with the purpose of the directive. celexid CELEX:52002PC0577:EN type Modified legislative proposal published title COM(2002)0577 url http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2003:071E:SOM:EN:HTML type Modified legislative proposal title OJ C 071 25.03.2003, p. 0001-0002 E type Modified legislative proposal body EC commission DG European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) Commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
committees	added	body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2001-07-10 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group PPE-DE name THEATO Diemut R. body EP responsible False committee JURI date 2001-09-11 committee_full Legal Affairs and Internal Market rapporteur group PSE name MARINHO Luís body EP responsible False committee LIBE date 2001-07-11 committee_full Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs rapporteur group GUE/NGL name DI LELLO FINUOLI Giuseppe
links	added	European Commission url http://ec.europa.eu/prelex/liste_resultats.cfm?CL=en&ReqId=0&DocType=COD&DocYear=2001&DocNum=0115 title PreLex
other	added	body EC dg European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
procedure	added	dossier_of_the_committee CONT/5/14818 reference 2001/0115(COD) subtype Legislation legal_basis Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 325-p4 stage_reached Awaiting Council 1st reading position / budgetary conciliation convocation instrument Directive title Fight against fraud: criminal-law protection of the Community's financial interests type COD - Ordinary legislative procedure (ex-codecision) subject 8.70.04 Action to combat Community fraud

activities/3/body	changed	Old unknown New CoA
activities/3/docs/0/type	changed	Old Follow-up document New Court of Auditors: opinion, report
activities/3/docs/1/type	changed	Old Follow-up document New Court of Auditors: opinion, report
activities/3/type	changed	Old Follow-up document New Court of Auditors: opinion, report
activities/5	added	date 2001-10-17 docs type Amendments tabled in committee title PE305.612/AM body EP type Amendments tabled in committee

activities/3/body	changed	Old CoA New unknown
activities/3/docs/0/type	changed	Old Court of Auditors: opinion, report New Follow-up document
activities/3/docs/1/type	changed	Old Court of Auditors: opinion, report New Follow-up document
activities/3/type	changed	Old Court of Auditors: opinion, report New Follow-up document

Email subscription

Parltrack

2001/0115(COD)

Activites

Documents

History

activities/0/commission/0	added	DG url http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/olaf/ title European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) Commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
activities/0/commission/0	deleted	DG European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) Commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
activities/8/commission/0	added	DG url http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/olaf/ title European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) Commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
activities/8/commission/0	deleted	DG European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) Commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
other/0	added	body EC dg url http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/olaf/ title European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
other/0	deleted	body EC dg European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas

procedure/legal_basis/0	added	TFEU 325-p4
procedure/legal_basis/0	deleted	Treaty on the Functioning of the EU TFEU 325-p4