Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-03-Speech-4-199-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-02-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110203.25.4-199-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-02-03-Speech-4-200-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Alfredo Pallone2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Canada (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-08--2011-07-31)3 member; EPP (2009-11-25--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Il Popolo della Libertà (2009-07-14--2013-12-16)3
lpv:translated text	"− The waiver of an MEP’s immunity is always a sensitive issue to address, but in some cases requests for waivers should be analysed in the context of an MEP’s duties. I do not believe that a simple complaint, where the person is accused of making what are seen as defamatory public statements, is reason enough to request the waiver of parliamentary immunity. The rules on immunity also show that the accusations made against Tamás Deutsch refer to opinions expressed in the course of his duties as a Member of the European Parliament. Therefore, Mr Deutsch was performing his duties as an MEP by expressing his opinion on a matter of public interest to his electorate. One should not try to prevent MEPs from expressing their opinions on matters of legitimate public interest, and that is why I voted in favour of Mr Speroni’s report against the waiver of Tamás Deutsch’s immunity."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph