Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-09-Speech-2-229"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020409.10.2-229"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, both personally and on behalf of my group, I would first like to thank the rapporteur very warmly for her report. Because this is a complicated and important topic it inevitably took some time to prepare, but we managed to find a workable compromise acceptable to the majority of this House. Not everyone will be happy, but that is in the nature of compromises. Nevertheless, it is a good result.
In view of the limited time I have, I wish to address just one very important aspect of our deliberations, and that is the issue of jurisdiction. The Commission originally proposed that in parallel, as it were, to the existing national structures, there should also be a system of purely European jurisdiction. I have always said, and I would like to stress this once again now, that I regard this approach as totally wrong.
We should not make the mistake that the United States has already made with its court system, so that on top of state courts there are also federal courts, with the guiding principle being that federal courts rule on federal law and state courts on state law. That is nonsensical, it cannot be explained to taxpayers, it costs a lot of money and leads to a divide in the administration of justice.
We very much believe that European courts are also national courts, and that national courts obviously have to apply not only national law but also European law. The approach adopted in this report by Anna Palacio Vallelersundi therefore represents a great step forward. That approach is that powers at national level can continue to be exercised with regard to European law in future, and that the court of first instance will be the existing national courts. In order to provide uniform administration of justice and avoid a lack of uniformity in Europe, the court of second instance will be a higher, European court. I regard that as a good proposal.
Mr President, please excuse me for having to leave this sitting very shortly, but I have another commitment and have to take part in another meeting. Please excuse me and thank you for your attention."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples