[Int-koordination] Deutsche Änderungsvorschläge zum CEEP

[Martina Pöser <martina.poeser AT bremen.piratenpartei.de>]

Moin,

hier die drei Änderungsvorschläge zum CEEP, die ich (neben einem ergänzenden Einleitungstext) nach bisherigem Stand für die PP-DE einreichen würde:

1. We will veto the text on energy policy, even if all the text is taken from the German proposal. There has been a heated discussion in the German Pirate Party about the question, if  we should have any position on energy policy at all, if we don't have a clear commitment against nuclear power as a part of it. As the opinion was divided and it is a topic close to the heart of many German Pirates we will rather veto the topic than loose support for the CEEP as a whole.

2. We propose to strike out the last half-sentence in the topic "Removal of Unfair Barriers":

We PIRATES want a larger and more direct participation of the citizens in the policy debate and decision making process, both individually and collectively.  We therefore demand the removal of unfair barriers to the participation of new political parties in the EU elections, such as the requirement of collecting a certain number of signatures in order to stand for election.

The reason is that there is no clear position of the German Pirates on the collection of signatures to stand for election. Some Pirates are in favour of having to collect a reasonable amount of signatures to show that theparty is a serious one and others are against it completely. If we strike it out, we don't need to decide on the dispute and after all, it doesn't add anything to the point, but illustrating it.

3. We like to reintroduce the following topic:

Legal Guarantee for Anonymous, Pseudonymous and Autonymous Access to Network Services

We PIRATES reject a constraint to use legal names on the Internet.

We are committed to guarantee citizens the anonymous access to the Internet and the users of social networks and similar services a pseudonymous and an autonymous access to these services by law. The freedom of _expression_ and self-definition of a person may not be curtailed for reasons of ostensible safety.

The reason for doing so, is that during our discussion in PP-DE about it, we became unsure, if the topic wasn't just rejected because of a misunderstanding. If I remember correctly, the main criticism was that this proposal would make it impossible for people to demand some kind of identification to use a forum or something similar. But the proposal just demands a guarantee for anonymous access to the internet and not to any social media like forums. There could be a demand for a pseudonymous or autonymous identification.


Habe ich noch was vergessen? Gibt es Einwände hiergegen?

LG, Martina