Cea mai titrată inițiativă cetățenească europeană (ICE), „Unul dintre noi”, prin care aproape 1,9 milioane de europeni solicită Comisiei Europene să ia măsuri pentru protecția vieții umane de la momentul concepției, s-a aflat în ultima vreme într-un con de umbră. Mai exact, după respingerea sa arbitrară de către aceeași Comisie Europeană (CE) care îi avizase startul, reprezentanții ICE „Unul dintre noi” au contestat decizia Comisiei la Curtea de Justiție a UE (cauza T 561/14) de la Luxemburg.
În aplicația transmisă pe 25 iulie 2014, reclamanții au solicitat ca refuzul CE, emis sub numărul COM(2014) 355 final pe 28 mai 2014, să fie anulat, iar CE să fie obligată să emită altul, mai potrivit cu premisele și conținutul inițiativei.
Suntem acum informați că instanța a primit răspunsul răspunsul (întâmpinarea) Comisiei Europene la acțiunea intentată de ICE „Unul dintre noi”.
În comunicatul de răspuns, reprezentatul comitetului de inițiativă, dr. Gregor Puppinck, jurist francez și directorul Centrului European pentru Lege și Justiție, vorbește despre „o mare victorie morală pentru UNUL DINTRE NOI și un dezastru pentru Comisie” care „eșuează total în apărarea conținutului” comunicării de respingere a Inițiativei:
“The Commission’s defence is based solely on formal arguments, claiming that Communication COM(2014) 355 final was ‘not a legal act that was intended to produce legal effects’, and that for this reason the court action should be declared inadmissible. In practical terms this means that the Commission claims to have the right to turn down a successful ECI without such decision being subject to any legal review. If accepted by the Court, this would de facto totally undermine the usefulness of the ECI as an instrument of participatory democracy.”
“The Commission absurdly claims that the reply to a successful ECI is not required to be based on consistent reasons or accurate factual assumptions, its sole purpose being that of ‘allowing for a possible political debate among citizens and within EU institutions’. Apparently the Commission believes that such a debate could not take place in the absence of a Commission document, even if that document may contain inconsistencies and factual misrepresentations (cf. § 39 of the Commission’s submission).”
“By consequence, the Commission argues that in assessing whether it has fulfilled its legal obligation of giving a response to a successful ECI the quality of that response is ‘irrelevant’. It claims that ‘only in extreme cases of manifest incorrectness of … factual assumptions or legal interpretations the Commission could be said not to have discharged its obligation under Article 10 (1) (c) of Regulation 211/2011′, thereby implying that false factual assumptions and erroneous legal interpretations must be accepted if they are not ‘extreme’ (cf. § 48 of the Commission’s submission).”
“As it appears, the Commission is not even trying to convince the Court that the reply given to ONE OF US was based on correct factual assumptions and legal interpretations. Instead, it claims that the manifest incorrectness of those assumptions and interpretations was not ‘extreme’.”
[…]
“ONE OF US takes note of, and expresses its astonishment over, the Commission’s complete failure in defending the material content of Communication COM(2014) 355 final against the well-founded criticism that was raised against it. This means that, whatever the outcome of the present lawsuit may be, this criticism will remain unchallenged and uncontradicted.“
“Given that the Commission itself does not any more seem convinced of the accuracy of factual assumptions and legal interpretations in Communication COM(2014) 355 final, the organizers of ONE OF US invite the Commission to withdraw that Communication and issue a new reply to their successful ECI.”
ICE „Unul dintre noi” va remite o replică formală la întâmpinarea Comisiei, nu mai târziu de 14 aprilie 2015. Vom reveni.
