Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-27-Speech-3-138"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-09-27"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060927.17.3-138"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-09-27-Speech-3-4022
lpv:speaker	lp:Bruno Gollnisch2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; TRAN (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3,3 member; ECON (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3,3 member; NA (2004-07-20--2007-01-14)3,3 unknown; Front national (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3,3 member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we did not vote for Mr Demetriou's report, even though it is a substantial improvement on the proposal for a framework decision tabled by the Council. Why did we not vote for it? Because, in spite of everything, this whole instrument is still remarkably ambiguous. What exactly does it mean that criminal decisions taken in a Member State will be taken into account? Will they be taken into account to avoid the application of the double jeopardy rule, in order to avoid unfair double convictions? That would be perfectly natural. On the flip side, however, does it mean taking them into account in order to suggest that someone is guilty on the basis of actions that are not regarded as criminal in their country of origin? For example, will the historian David Irving, who is currently unjustly imprisoned in Austria for a thought crime, be regarded, when he returns to his country, which we hope will happen soon, as a criminal and persistent offender, when he is doubtless the greatest British Second World War historian? Those are some of the ambiguities contained in this text, which, in our view, justify our reticence, all the more so because there is a convention on this matter, the convention of 1970. As the report quite rightly states, a framework decision cannot unilaterally amend an international convention. This also raises the problem of the States that are not Members of the European Union but that nevertheless ratified that convention. This reservation, which we have developed since ratification, presents a new problem in international law, which we would prefer to regulate under the terms of the international conventions."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph