Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-18-Speech-4-058"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-11-18"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Internal OLAF investigations2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991118.4.4-058"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-11-18-Speech-4-0592
lpv:speaker	lp:Elmar Brok2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Conference of Committee Chairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2002-03-07)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 chair; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, up to now there has been a succession of procedural errors which I hope will not work to the detriment of the Parliament in possible court cases. I should like to say to Mr Corbett that a Member of the European Parliament has never been above the law, even if these Rules of Procedure are not changed. We are always subject to the law and also to criminal law. That must be stressed quite clearly, independently of our internal Rules here. What we are dealing with here is the method by which the controls, checks and investigations are carried out. I am of the opinion that we must ensure that the freedom of the individual Members of Parliament, including those who belong to a minority, must be protected from political pressure from outside and from within, so that they are not overrun with proceedings so that they are in the end so involved that they cannot deal with the situation any more. That is the classic principle of the independence of the mandate that has been fought for over many centuries, particularly as protection from the executive. Only in this way is the Member of Parliament able to exercise control. He must have the right to refuse to bear witness, without any ‘ifs’ or ‘buts’. This already applies to us but the ways in which it applies partially negate it. A Member of Parliament can then only if he has this right to refuse to bear witness, keep information to himself and only then will people come to him and tell him something if they know that he must not inform on them. Only then can we exercise control within the meaning of Parliament vis--vis the executive and we should not ruin this by linking everything – whether officials, the executive or the Members of Parliament in one and the same Article. If this is adopted here today and the anger dies down, we would perhaps then again have the strength to check whether with a proper goal the inclusion of the Members of Parliament in control mechanisms can protect this independent mandate and perhaps lead to some other phrasing. This is not possible just now in the heat of the moment and I would ask my colleagues to remember this if it comes up again."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph