What I was pointing out last week was we have the ability in our existing authorities and in my existing authorities to do just that, which is in cases of outrageous conduct —and it is plainly laid out in our disciplinary system — to suspend members, to seek their dismissal, but in awaiting the disciplinary process for the decision around dismissal, to suspend their pay and allowances.

Now that we have a disciplinary/judicial process with the RCMP, why are we engaged with another disciplinary action from our side of the house without having the results of the disciplinary action that the committee recommended, which is going to the RCMP, and after we get the result of that, then take whatever subsequent administrative/actions that we should take?

Awareness of workplace harassment prohibitions can also reduce Police Services Act charges, which is our internal discipline process, and other service-imposed discipline.

12. Welcomes the adoption of the Strategy and the Action Plan on the reform of the judiciary 2013-2018, built around the key principles of independence, impartiality, competence, quality of the judiciary and freedom from political interference; urges the authorities to intensify this reform in line with the recommendations of the Venice Commission, especially with regard to the role of the parliament in judicial appointments and the independence of the prosecution, and with a view to the screening process of Chapter 23, which commenced on 25 September 2013; stresses the importance of strengthening the independence of High Judicial and ...[+++]State Prosecutorial Councils and reducing the backlog of cases, as a necessary condition for the successful sequencing of the entire reform process; calls on the authorities to provide all the necessary resources for the Judicial Academy, which should be instrumental in guaranteeing merit-based recruitments; emphasises the need for continuous training of judges and prosecutors to deal with complex financial cases and economic crimes; urges the authorities responsible to ensure a transparent and merit-based process of appointment of judges and prosecutors as well as a solid track-record of disciplinary proceedings against the judicial personnel; insists further on the need to ensure timely justice together with the unification of jurisprudence, the publication of, and easy access to, all judicial decisions immediately after adoption and the random allocation of cases in all courts; is concerned about the legal uncertainty arising from the number of judges carrying out their duties in acting capacity; reiterates the fact that a strong and independent judiciary is key to Serbia’s capacity to meet EU membership criteria;

10. Considers it essential that lawyers acting as lobbyists should not be exempt from this initiative and its rules on registration; encourages the Commission to determine a formula which allows lawyers and their clients the justified protection afforded by their rules of professional conduct when they are truly acting in a professional legal capacity, including in particular all activities carried out by a lawyer in connection with any representation of a client in judicial, quasi-judicial, administrative, disciplinary and other proceedings, for example when providing legal advice on staff cases, anti-dumping cases or competition law p ...[+++]roceedings, including mergers and state aid and legal advice on the way in which the political and decision-making processes of the European institutions function;

However, this is not achieved through penalties and sanctions but by integrating them into all aspects and activities of their social environment - ensuring their education, smooth integration into the labour market, protecting their right to self expression and active participation in decision-makings at local and national level, offering them the possibility of creative leisure activities and recreation.