According to sources, a conciliation committee, the third and final phase of EU law-making, will run late into tomorrow night (4 November), sparking fears among MEPs that they will be forced to agree to the Council's version of the package, eliminating Internet users' right to a fair trial.
A spokesman from the office of MEP Christian Engström, the founder of Sweden's Pirate Party, said the layout of the evening suggests that MEPs will be asked to finalise the process tomorrow.
The Council is getting a reputation among MEPs for rushing their decision-making without briefing them properly, the spokesman added.
He alleges that MEPs had not even seen the new text on paper, which included "some significant changes," before being asked to make a decision at the Parliament's session in Strasbourg on 20 October.
Parliament already bowed to the Council
The telecoms package has been the subject of vehement debate between the Parliament and the Council. The endless discussions focused on Amendment 138 which stresses the need for "prior ruling by the judicial authorities" for those suspected of illegal downloading.
The most recent text from the Parliament made substantial concessions to the Council's thinking and deleted references to a "prior" ruling at a "judicial authority" (EurActiv 23/10/09).
The new wording shows that the Parliament is now willing to agree with the Council, argues Jérémie Zimmermann, from La Quadrature du Net, an Internet advocacy NGO.
The new text, which reads "any measures may only be adopted as a result of a prior, fair and impartial procedure," was tabled by re-elected S&D MEP Catherine Trautmann, who before the June elections had fought hard to keep references to a judicial authority.
'New text not Hadopi-proof'
The Council's version of the text, seen by EurActiv, shows the deletion of two key words, 'prior' and 'judicial'.
MEPs argue that the new wording will give private corporations and administrative bodies a mandate to cut off a person's Internet access without a fair trial.
Lena EK, a Swedish liberal MEP, argued that the word 'prior' must be in the text for it to represent a viable solution to piracy, a spokesperson from her office confirmed.
"This text is not Hadopi proof," Engström's office argues, referencing a draft French law which allows an administrative body to cut off an Internet connection after the third attempt to download illegally.
In practice, removing 'prior' from the text would allow an Internet user accused of illegal downloading to appeal the decision to cut off their Internet access after the interruption has occurred.
"It could take years to appeal a decision," Engstrom's spokesperson added.
Britain's Mandelson at heart of row?
MEPs hinted that the row over the word 'prior' comes from the UK's business secretary, Lord Peter Mandelson, who reportedly argued that the including it would limit the country's policy options.
Mandelson has previously been suspected of pandering to influential lobbyists in the entertainment and banking industries on illegal file-sharing.
The politician allegedly met DreamWorks co-founder David Geffen on the Greek island of Corfu, British newspapers reported.
An unnamed government source told the Britain's Times newspaper that Mandelson demanded tougher regulation upon his return from Greece, even though before the meeting he had shown no interest in the country's digital policy.
