FYI, voici l'amendement que la Commission JURI a adopté mercredi dernier. A jeudi prochain.

jluc

 

Article 22 c (new)

In accordance with Articles 24 and 90, each institution shall put in place a procedure for the handling of complaints by officials concerning the way in which were treated after or in consequence of the fulfilment by them of their obligations under Article 22a or Article 22b. The institution concerned shall ensure that such complaints are handled confidentially and, where warranted by the circumstances, before the expiry of the deadlines set out in Article 90.

Every institution shall lay down internal rules on inter alia:

– the provision to officials referred to in Article 22a(1) or Article 22b of information on the handling of the matters reported by them,

– the protection of the legitimate interests of these officials and of their privacy, and

– the procedure for the handling of complaints referred to in the first paragraph of this Article.



From: FEUGIER Jean-Luc (HR)
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 3:08 PM
To: WILLIAMS Karen (HR)
Cc: BERNASCHI Corina Alina (HR)
Subject: RE: Transparency International feedback on Whistleblowing

Hi Karen,
Parfait pour moi jeudi prochain.
jluc


From: WILLIAMS Karen (HR)
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 3:03 PM
To: FEUGIER Jean-Luc (HR)
Cc: BERNASCHI Corina Alina (HR)
Subject: RE: Transparency International feedback on Whistleblowing

Hi Jean-Luc – Rene is back next Wednesday and I am away next Friday, so best day for meeting is Thursday, or Wednesday if otherwise not possible. I will ask Corina to contact you to arrange meeting with Rene, Christoph and myself, in my office, thanks Karen


From: FEUGIER Jean-Luc (HR)
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 2:34 PM
To: WILLIAMS Karen (HR); SLOOTJES Rene (HR); SCHIEBLE Christoph (HR)
Subject: FW: Transparency International feedback on Whistleblowing

Karen, René, Christoph,

Je propose que nous reparlions ensemble de ce dossier avant de revenir vers la Cabinet. De mon côté, je vais tenir informé IS des suggestions de CLI et revenir vers vous. Quand seriez-vous disponible la semaine prochaine pour une réunion ?

 

jluc


From: LINDER Christian (CAB-SEFCOVIC)
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 2:29 PM
To: SLOOTJES Rene (HR)
Cc: WILLIAMS Karen (HR); FEUGIER Jean-Luc (HR); SCHIEBLE Christoph (HR); BIERVERT Bernd (CAB-SEFCOVIC); PRADINES Marie-Helene (CAB-SEFCOVIC); MAGNIER Michel (HR); JAKOB Thinam (HR)
Subject: RE: Transparency International feedback on Whistleblowing

René,

 

Ok to close the ISC. Your comments/changes in reply to the DGs contributions are fine for me.

With regard to Public Concern at Work, I leave it to your judgment. We should indeed avoid the impression that we privilege Transparency International. If they are an expert organisation, please consult them.

Once they have reacted we should meet to discuss their and TI's comments and finalise the text.

 

A more general reflection: Since the EP proposed an amendment to the Staff Regs on whistleblowing which might pass in the end and could be applicable as of 2013, I wonder if the College should really adopt the guidelines before.

(I think the current JURI amendment would simply require us to add a reference to Art. 24/90 as complaint procedure.)

To be discussed when we meet to discuss the comments from TI and the other NGO.

 

This is linked with a third point: the VP wanted a meeting of the ethics correspondents with the himself, the European Ombudsman and the chairman of the Disciplinary Board still this year.

But we said only after adoption of the guidelines on whistleblowing.

We should discuss what to do with this at the meeting as well. All ideas are welcome.

 

C.

 


From: SLOOTJES Rene (HR)
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 5:48 PM
To: LINDER Christian (CAB-SEFCOVIC)
Cc: WILLIAMS Karen (HR); FEUGIER Jean-Luc (HR); SCHIEBLE Christoph (HR)
Subject: RE: Transparency International feedback on Whistleblowing

Christian,

Just went through the text – some points are certainly worth considering.

We would suggest to first close the CIS on the basis of the table with comments and the final text (for which we need your ok and that of Jean-Luc), and then deal with the 'external' consultation, to avoid confusion.

Do you agree that we also send the text to Public Concern at Work? This was the organisation that contacted us following the public hearing – it is the leading organisation for whistleblowing (probably more so than TI). They have taken a keen interest and involving them would strengthen our case vis-à-vis the EP and other potential critics. They should be able to reply fairly quickly.

In the meantime we will analyse the TI comments and come back to you asap with some suggestions for discussion.

René


From: LINDER Christian (CAB-SEFCOVIC)
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 11:30 AM
To: SLOOTJES Rene (HR); WILLIAMS Karen (HR)
Cc: NOCIAR Juraj (CAB-SEFCOVIC); HR MAIL 01
Subject: FW: Transparency International feedback on Whistleblowing
Importance: High

Karen, René,

 

here are the comments/track-changes from Transparency International.

Some seem to be just drafting, others substantial, some seem agreeable, others not.

 

Can you check what you think we can take on board and what we cannot?

Then we should discuss together and in the end also provide a reply to TI thanking them for contribution and explaining what we took on board and what we didn't and why.

We should mention somewhere in the text addressed to college that we asked for comments from TI and can give the reference numbers of the documents.

 

Better ideas to handle this are welcome...

 

C.

 

 


From: Jana Mittermaier [mailto:[email address]]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 6:30 PM
To: LINDER Christian (CAB-SEFCOVIC)
Cc: Dominic Robinson
Subject: Transparency International feedback on Whistleblowing
Importance: High

Dear Mr Linder,

Thank you for the meeting on the 1st March.  

We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit our expertise in the area of Whistle blowing to the European Commission.

Please, find attached the draft communication on whistleblowing with Transparency International’s comments, suggestions and proposed amendments included.

To provide the feedback in the most efficient manner the document was scanned and converted into Word format. This was done to provide the feedback in the text via ‘track changes’ as well as in ‘comment boxes’ on the right hand column of the document. The conversion was only done for the purpose of providing efficient expert input to the European Commission.

As you know, we are an organisation that is promoting transparency in the EU decision-making process. This is why we assume that the results of your consultations with stakeholders (like TI’s expert recommendations attached) on the issue of Whistle blowing will be dealt with in a transparent and open manner. Usually, we recommend that the contributions to consultations such as this one should be made public in the final communication or attached to the final communication in a “legislative footprint” (record of expert contributions). 

Best regards,

Jana Mittermaier.

Jana Mittermaier

Head of Office

TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL

Liaison Office to the EU

Rue Breydel 40

B-1040 Brussels (Belgium)

Phone: +32 (0)2 23 58 621

Fax: +32 (0)2 23 58 610

Email: [email address]

www.transparencyinternational.eu

 

This email is confidential and intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure, distribution, printing or copying of this email is unauthorised. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to the email, then delete all copies from your computer. This email and its attachments have been swept for computer viruses but Transparency International accepts no responsibility whatsoever for damage caused by viruses in connection with this email. Transparency International may monitor all emails and attachments as it is presumed that they are sent or received in connection with the activities of TI and to ensure the integrity of its computer systems. Statements and opinions contained in this email are those of the sender, not necessarily of Transparency International.