Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-26-Speech-3-127"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060426.13.3-127"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we are once again debating, as we have already done many times in this Parliament, a very sensitive issue, which relates to immunity.
As you well know, Madam President, the section of the statue that we approved was the less important part. I said in that debate – and I repeat it today – that this is a fundamental issue that affects our rules and enhances the European Parliament and our role, especially our role.
The request to the Council is directed along those lines, and I hope that Parliament as a whole takes account of this request and that each group and each MEP, even on an individual basis, supports it, because only in this way will it be possible to exert pressure on the Council.
I am honoured to have reopened the debate with my question, on behalf of the Committee on Legal Affairs and its coordinators. I believe that all of my fellow Members are aware of the need for common rules of the European Parliament in relation to immunity; it is a long-held ambition of the European Parliament to have such rules.
Twenty years ago, one of our fellow Members, named Mr Donnez, gained approval for a report on European parliamentary immunity with the aim of overcoming a situation that, 20 years back, was already limited and unsuited to the scope of the European Parliament as a whole. The Protocol on Privileges and Immunity stipulated that Members of the European Parliament could not be questioned in relation to the votes they cast but, at the same time, it deferred to the Members’ national laws to lay down the rules on immunity.
Naturally, there was a logic to all of this and, at that time, given that Parliament was then an assembly of the various national parliaments, the rule had its own
its own justification. It will have escaped no one’s attention, however, that today there exists a body of case-law, thanks to universal suffrage, with all the breakthroughs obtained in the meantime, while Parliament itself has not stood still. There is also a determined attitude on the part of the Committee on Legal Affairs, which during the last parliamentary term expressed and supported a different need, namely that all Members of the European Parliament should have a common statutory reference, a common organisational reference.
It is clear not only to the Committee on Legal Affairs, but also to Parliament as a whole, how difficult it is for Members to have to refer back to national laws: the United Kingdom has a certain type of legislation, Germany has another, and Italy had yet another one, and then it amended it. That does not promote credibility and does not result in the European Parliament’s becoming genuinely autonomous or independent.
Following a great many debates, even you, Madam President, in your current capacity as Chair of this House, will be well aware of the Statute for Members of the European Parliament, given that we have debated and approved it within the Committee on Legal Affairs and twice over in this Chamber.
The Council, however, objected to the subject’s being reincorporated into the primary legislation, so we amended the part of the statute that related to Parliament’s organisational aspects; an albeit difficult management exercise followed, which subsequently yielded a result: the Council – and here is the crux of the issue Madam President, ladies and gentlemen – endeavoured to convene an intergovernmental meeting of the Member States, including all of the various countries, in order to be able to ratify what we had decided in Parliament.
I believe that we have now struck a very important balance: we have debated and we have very astutely bestowed on the Members of the European Parliament as a whole prerogatives that enhance the role of Parliament and increase its independence.
Obviously, since the Council’s commitment already dates back to May 2005 and we are now practically in May 2006, our intention, in submitting this question, was to seek a swift conclusion. Since our fellow Member, Mr Donnez, was already aware of this need 20 years ago and, as Parliament’s vote has shown, it has remained important and crucial, the Council needs immediately to ratify what we have decided and established. We have taken a great leap forward; when this is recognised we will undoubtedly be able to bestow on Members of the European Parliament a much more important and much more precious role."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples