Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-02-Speech-3-074"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Request for the waiver of Johannes Voggenhuber's immunity2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010502.5.3-074"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-02-Speech-3-0752
lpv:speaker	lp:Maria Berger2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; PES (2000-03-08--2002-01-16)3 member; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, for a long time now, one thing that we have been able to rely on in Austria's domestic political scene is the Freedom Party and Jörg Haider bombarding their critics – the media in general, individual journalists, other politicians and also individual members of the public – with lawsuits. The current Minister for Justice has in the past appeared in court in connection with some of these cases in his capacity as a lawyer. Many of the legal judgments handed down are most interesting, because Austria's judges can now at least still display sufficient independence. Not long ago, for example, it was established at appeal in the case brought by Jörg Haider against the university professor Anton Pelinka, which also attracted international attention, that the statement that the Freedom Party was playing down Nazi atrocities was permissible. We would also have expected a similar clarification of a fundamental point in the case of the lawsuit brought by Jörg Haider against our fellow Member Johannes Voggenhuber, by which I mean establishing whether or not the Freedom Party is a fascist, neo-fascist, or post-fascist party. In order to establish the facts of the matter, Johannes Voggenhuber, in contrast to his colleague Mr Sichrovsky, has himself asked for his immunity to be waived. However, for reasons of principle, which I support, the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market has been unable to accede to this request. Nevertheless, I hope that it will be possible to achieve legal clarification of the nature of the Freedom Party in some other way. I would now like to use my remaining speaking time to point out that I am amazed that the report on the Sichrovsky case as adopted in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market was amended before it reached the plenary, so that in many places it is no longer as clear as when it was adopted by the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph