{"id":23814,"date":"2016-07-14T19:14:28","date_gmt":"2016-07-14T17:14:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.access-info.org\/?p=23814"},"modified":"2018-11-13T09:46:11","modified_gmt":"2018-11-13T08:46:11","slug":"eu-institutions-urged-to-adopt-ombudsman-proposals-for-trilogue-transparency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/2016-07-14\/eu-institutions-urged-to-adopt-ombudsman-proposals-for-trilogue-transparency\/","title":{"rendered":"EU institutions urged to adopt Ombudsman proposals for trilogue transparency"},"content":{"rendered":"

Madrid, 14 July 2016 – European Ombudsman Emily O\u2019Reilly today published key recommendations<\/a> calling on the EU institutions to increase transparency of negotiations over future legislation, the EU\u2019s traditionally secretive \u201ctrilogue\u201d meetings.<\/p>\n

Access Info welcomed O\u2019Reilly\u2019s call for proactive publication of key information to shed light on this secretive part of the EU legislative process, noting that the EU treaties require openness in the legislative process.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is high time the EU institutions act upon the fact trilogues are part of the EU legislative process and subject them to the same standards of transparency, public scrutiny, and participation as any other part of EU law making,<\/em>\u201d stated Andreas Pavlou, RTI Campaigner at Access Info Europe.<\/p>\n

Whilst the Ombudsman defended institutional concerns about providing a closed space for discussion away from public participation, she stated it is still important that the public is provided afterwards with all the information necessary to understand and scrutinise the process that has occurred.<\/p>\n

The types of documents that the EU institutions should make public according to the Ombudsman include four-column tables, pre-negotiating positions of institutions, lists of meeting participants, and meeting agendas.<\/p>\n

The Ombudsman also reflected Access Info\u2019s comments to her public consultation<\/a> that timely proactive publication of information would help to address concerns around privileged access of lobbyists and better provide a level playing field for all those wishing to participate in EU law-making. She recommended information be publicly available as well via an easy-to-use and easy-to-understand joint database on line.<\/p>\n

Although the Ombudsman has no binding power, the three main EU institutions have until the 16 December 2016 to inform O\u2019Reilly of any action they have taken in relation to her proposals.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt would be reckless were EU institutions to completely ignore the Ombudsman\u2019s recommendations, following ever-mounting demands for greater accountability of EU lawmakers and more citizen participation in the legislative process,<\/em>\u201d added Pavlou.<\/p>\n

You can find the Ombudsman Decision and recommendations to improve trilogue transparency, here: http:\/\/www.ombudsman.europa.eu\/cases\/decision.faces\/en\/69206\/html.bookmark#_ftn24<\/a><\/p>\n

For more information please contact:<\/h2>\n

Andreas Pavlou<\/strong> | Access Info Europe
\nSend an e-mail<\/a> or call +34\u202f913\u202f656\u202f558<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Madrid, 14 July 2016 – European Ombudsman Emily O\u2019Reilly today published key recommendations calling on the EU institutions to increase transparency of negotiations over future legislation, the EU\u2019s traditionally secretive \u201ctrilogue\u201d meetings. Access Info welcomed O\u2019Reilly\u2019s call for proactive publication of key information to shed light on this secretive part of the EU legislative process, noting that the EU treaties require openness in the legislative process. \u201cIt is high time the EU institutions act upon the fact trilogues are part of the EU legislative process and subject them to the same standards of transparency, public scrutiny, and participation as any<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":23817,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[125,51],"tags":[549,547,817,816,818,546,760],"class_list":["post-23814","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-eut","category-article","tag-eu-transparency","tag-euombudsman","tag-inquiry","tag-oreilly","tag-trialogues","tag-trilogues","tag-trilogues-transparency"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23814","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=23814"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23814\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":23820,"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23814\/revisions\/23820"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/23817"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23814"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23814"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.access-info.org\/es\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23814"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}