Taken from a posting to the cyber-rights-uk mailing list. Suitably anonymised, naturally.
back to ntk Steps up to now: Apparently there has been an Austrian proposal to the European Council to take action against child pornography. Council has to consult the Parliament (see below on procedure) and the Parliament can then vote a resolution inviting the Council to consider this resulution in this or that way. --------------------------------------------------------------- By letter of 7 December 1999 the Council consulted the European Parliament pursuant to Article 39(1) of the EU Treaty on the initiative of the Republic of Austria with a view to adopting a Council Decision to combat child pornography on the Internet (10317/1999 - 1999/0822 (CNS)). --------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission on Legal Affairs, etc has discussed it and requested opinions from other commissions. It has agreed on a resolution which approves the initiative subject to some amendments, including the introduction in article 3 of the clause --------------------------------------------------------------- (Amendment 24) Article 3(-a) (new) (-a) ensure that the identity of persons who obtain an electronic mail (e-mail) address can be established. Justification: The possibility of sending anonymous e-mails which even the authorities cannot trace back to their senders makes prosecution impossible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The resolution then went to the plenary of 11 April 2000, See: the legislative resolution. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 10. Child pornography on the Internet * (vote) Report: Kirkhope - A5-0090/2000 (Simple majority) INITIATIVE WITH A VIEW TO THE ADOPTION OF A DECISION 10317/1999 - C5-0318/1999 -1999/ 0822(CNS): The rapporteur stated that the PPE-DE Group had requested separate votes on amendments 18, 24, 25 and 26. The President replied that the request had been submitted after the deadline had expired and was therefore inadmissible. Amendments adopted: 1, 2, 4 to 20 and 22 to 28 collectively; 3; 29 by EV (269 for, 165 against, 14 abstentions); 21 by EV (255 for, 188 against, 11 abstentions) Amendments rejected: 31; 33; 32 Amendment fallen: 30 As a result the debated amendment was adopted by the Parliament: Parliament approved the text of the initiative as amended (Item 4 of "Texts Adopted"). DRAFT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION: Commissioner Schreyer stated that the Commission was in a position to accept the amendments adopted by Parliament. Parliament adopted the legislative resolution by RCV (PPE-DE) (Item 4 of "Texts Adopted"). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Next steps: The procedure is defined in article 39 of the Treaty on the European Union. This is part of Justice and Internal Affairs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Article 39 (ex Article K.11) 1. The Council shall consult the European Parliament before adopting any measure referred to in Article 34(2)(b), (c) and (d). The European Parliament shall deliver its opinion within a time limit which the Council may lay down, which shall not be less than three months. In the absence of an opinion within that time limit, the Council may act. 2. The Presidency and the Commission shall regularly inform the European Parliament of discussions in the areas covered by this Title. 3. The European Parliament may ask questions of the Council or make recommendations to it. Each year, it shall hold a debate on the progress made in the areas referred to in this Title. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- So apparently the Council does whatever it wants and when it wants with the recommendation from the European Parliament. But, to my great shame, I very much reach the limits of my understanding of European procedures.
back to ntk