Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-04-23-Speech-1-137"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20070423.18.1-137"6
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@en4
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@cs1
"Hr. formand! Jeg vil gerne give udtryk for min modstand mod EU's uhyrlige indblanding i medlemsstaternes straffelovgivning, der går så vidt som til at stille krav om indførelse af nye strafbare handlinger og diktere strafferammen i Det Forenede Kongerige og andre lande. Baggrunden for denne utålelige krænkelse af national suverænitet er Domstolens skændige afgørelse fra september 2005. Vi er nu blevet præsenteret for et forslag, der indebærer en omsiggribende udvidelse af Kommissionens beføjelser. Dette direktiv er endnu mere forkasteligt ud fra en britisk synsvinkel, fordi en krænkelse af patentlovgivningen for første gang bliver en strafbar handling med en strafferamme på mindst fire års fængsel, ikke fordi det valgte Underhus mener, at det er nødvendigt eller klogt, men fordi den ikkefolkevalgte Kommission dikterer dette. Jeg protesterer imod og afviser denne utålelige indblanding fra EU's side, og jeg forkaster derfor dette direktiv."@da2
"Herr Präsident! Ich möchte meinen Einspruch dagegen zu Protokoll geben, dass sich die EU in das Strafrecht der Mitgliedstaaten in einem solch ungeheuerlichen Maße einmischt, dass sie fordert, neue Straftatbestände einzuführen, und die Höhe der strafrechtlichen Maßnahmen im Vereinigten Königreich und anderen Staaten festlegt. Die schändliche Entscheidung des Gerichtshofes vom September 2005 hat zu dieser unerträglichen Verletzung der nationalen Souveränität geführt. Was wir jetzt erleben, ist ein Programm der zügellosen Ausweitung der Macht der Kommission. Das Vereinigte Königreich hat umso mehr Grund, gegen diese Richtlinie Einwand zu erheben, als zum ersten Mal die Verletzung eines Patents zu einer Straftat werden würde, die mit vier Jahren Gefängnis oder mehr geahndet werden kann. Und das nicht etwa, weil das gewählte Unterhaus dies für notwendig oder klug hielte, sondern weil es von der nicht gewählten EU-Kommission diktiert wird. Ich erhebe Einspruch, ich lehne diese untragbare Einmischung der EU und damit diese Richtlinie ab."@de9
"Κύριε Πρόεδρε, λαμβάνω τον λόγο για να επισημάνω την αντίθεσή μου στην ανάμειξη της ΕΕ στο ποινικό δίκαιο των κρατών μελών, στον τερατώδη βαθμό να ζητεί νέα παραπτώματα και να υπαγορεύει το επίπεδο των ποινών που πρέπει να επιβάλλονται στο Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο και σε άλλα κράτη μέλη. Η θλιβερή απόφαση του Δικαστηρίου του Σεπτεμβρίου του 2005 αποτέλεσε την αφορμή γι’ αυτήν την απαράδεκτη παραβίαση της εθνικής κυριαρχίας. Παρατηρούμε τώρα ένα πρόγραμμα αχαλίνωτου επεκτατισμού των εξουσιών της Επιτροπής. Η παρούσα οδηγία είναι ακόμη πιο αποδοκιμαστέα από την άποψη του Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου επειδή, για πρώτη φορά, θα καταστήσει την παραβίαση ενός διπλώματος ευρεσιτεχνίας ποινικό αδίκημα κολάσιμο με τετραετή φυλάκιση ή περισσότερο· όχι επειδή η εκλεγμένη Βουλή των Κοινοτήτων το θεωρεί απαραίτητο ή συνετό, αλλά επειδή το επιτάσσει η μη εκλεγμένη Επιτροπή. Διαφωνώ, απορρίπτω αυτήν την απαράδεκτη παρέμβαση της ΕΕ και, συνεπώς, απορρίπτω αυτήν την οδηγία."@el10
"Señor Presidente, quiero expresar mi oposición a la injerencia de la UE en el Derecho penal de los Estados miembros hasta el punto monstruoso de exigir nuevos delitos y de dictar el grado de sanciones que deben aplicarse en el Reino Unido y otros Estados. La nefanda sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de septiembre de 2005 da lugar a esta intolerable violación de la soberanía nacional. Ahora somos testigos de un programa de expansionismo de poder desenfrenado de la Comisión. Esta Directiva es si cabe más reprobable desde la perspectiva británica porque, por primera vez, tipificaría penalmente la violación de patentes con una sanción de cuatro años o más de cárcel; no porque la Cámara de los Comunes, elegida por los ciudadanos, piense que es necesario o sensato, sino porque la Comisión Europea, que no ha sido elegida, lo dicta así. Me opongo y rechazo esta intolerable interferencia de la UE y, por tanto, estoy en contra de esta Directiva."@es21
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@et5
"Arvoisa puhemies, puheenvuorossani ilmoitan vastustavani EU:n puuttumista jäsenvaltioiden rikosoikeuteen, koska on järkyttävää, että EU vaatii uusia rikosnimikkeitä ja sanelee Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa ja muissa valtioissa täytäntöön pantavien rangaistusseuraamusten tason. Yhteisöjen tuomioistuimen syyskuussa 2005 antama pahaenteinen tuomio on lähtökohtana tälle sietämättömälle kansallisen suvereenisuuden loukkaamiselle. Tällä hetkellä tarkastelemme komission ohjelmaa, jolla toimivaltaa pyritään laajentamaan rajulla kädellä. Yhdistyneen kuningaskunnan on vastustettava tätä direktiiviä sitäkin suuremmalla syyllä, koska patentin loukkaamisesta tehtäisiin ensimmäistä kertaa rikos, josta olisi langetettava vähintään neljän vuoden vankeusrangaistus, ja näin ei olisi sen vuoksi, että vaaleilla valitut edustajat alahuoneessa pitäisivät tätä tarpeellisena tai järkevänä, vaan sen vuoksi, että EU:n ei vaaleilla valittu komissio näin käskee. Vastustan tätä EU:n sietämätöntä asioihin sekaantumista, torjun sen ja hylkään siten tämän direktiivin."@fi7
"Monsieur le Président, je prends la parole pour manifester mon opposition à l’ingérence de l’Union européenne dans le droit pénal des États membres, au point monstrueux d’exiger l’introduction de nouvelles infractions et de dicter le niveau des sanctions à appliquer au Royaume-Uni et dans d’autres États. L’abominable arrêt de la Cour de justice de septembre 2005 est responsable de cette atteinte intolérable à la souveraineté nationale. Nous assistons actuellement à un programme d’expansionnisme déchaîné du pouvoir de la Commission. Cette directive est d’autant plus choquante pour le Royaume-Uni, car, pour la première fois, la violation d’un brevet deviendrait une infraction pénale passible d’un emprisonnement de minimum quatre ans, non pas parce que la Chambre des communes, organe élu, juge cela nécessaire ou judicieux, mais parce que la Commission européenne, organe non élu, l’impose. Je proteste contre cette ingérence intolérable de l’UE et je la refuse. Je voterai donc contre cette proposition directive."@fr8
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@hu11
"Signor Presidente, intervengo affinché sia messo a verbale che, a mio parere, è inammissibile che l’UE interferisca nel diritto penale degli Stati membri fino al mostruoso punto di chiedere l’introduzione di nuovi reati e di stabilire il livello di sanzioni da applicare nel Regno Unito e in altri Stati. La scellerata sentenza della Corte di giustizia del settembre 2005 dà luogo a questa inammissibile violazione della sovranità nazionale. Stiamo assistendo a un programma di imperversante espansionismo del potere della Commissione. La direttiva è tanto più opinabile nella prospettiva britannica dal momento che, per la prima volta, la violazione in campo brevettuale diventerebbe sanzionabile con un minimo di quattro anni di detenzione, non perché la ritenga tale misura necessaria od opportuna, ma perché è la Commissione, non eletta a suffragio universale, a decretarlo. Mi oppongo, respingo questa intollerabile ingerenza dell’UE e pertanto respingo questa direttiva."@it12
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@lt14
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@lv13
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@mt15
"Mijnheer de Voorzitter, ik spreek mij uit tegen de bemoeienis van de EU met het strafrecht van lidstaten, die zelfs zo ver gaat dat de Unie nieuwe delicten wil formuleren en de hoogte van de straffen wil bepalen die in het Verenigd Koninkrijk en andere staten zouden moeten worden opgelegd. Het schandalige besluit van het Hof van Justitie van september 2005 maakt deze onduldbare schending van de nationale soevereiniteit mogelijk. We zien nu dan ook dat de Commissie op buitensporige wijze zijn machtsbereik aan het uitbreiden is. Deze richtlijn is met name vanuit het gezichtspunt van het Verenigd Koninkrijk ongewenst, omdat schending van het patentrecht voor het eerst zou worden beschouwd als een delict dat bestraft kan worden met een gevangenisstraf van vier jaar of langer, niet omdat de gekozen leden van het Lagerhuis dit noodzakelijk of verstandig achten, maar omdat de niet-gekozen leden van de Commissie dit dicteren. Ik maak hiertegen bezwaar, ik keer mij tegen deze onduldbare bemoeizucht van de EU en verwerp daarom de richtlijn."@nl3
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@pl16
"Senhor Presidente, intervenho para declarar a minha oposição à ingerência comunitária na esfera do direito criminal dos Estados-Membros, que vai ao monstruoso extremo de impor a definição de novos tipos de crimes e de ditar o nível das penalidades a cominar no Reino Unido e outros Estados. Esta intolerável violação da soberania nacional constitui uma consequência do nefando acórdão do Tribunal de Justiça de Setembro de 2005. Presentemente, está a assistir-se ao desenvolvimento de uma verdadeira ofensiva, destinada a alargar os poderes da Comissão. Esta directiva é ainda mais condenável do ponto de vista do Reino Unido, porque, pela primeira vez, fará da violação de patente uma infracção criminal punível com quatro anos de prisão ou mais; não por a Câmara dos Comuns eleita considerar que tal é necessário ou avisado, mas por a Comissão não eleita da UE assim o ditar. Rejeito e oponho-me a esta interferência intolerável da UE e, como tal, rejeito a presente directiva."@pt17
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@ro18
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@sk19
"Mr President, I speak to record my opposition to the EU's meddling in the criminal law of Member States to the monstrous extent of demanding new offences and dictating the level of penalties to be enforced in the United Kingdom and other states. The nefarious Court of Justice decision of September 2005 gives rise to this intolerable infringement of national sovereignty. Now we are seeing a programme of rampant expansionism of power by the Commission. This directive is even more objectionable from the UK perspective because, for the first time, it would make breach of patent a criminal offence punishable by four years’ imprisonment or more; not because the elected House of Commons thinks that it is necessary or wise but because the unelected EU Commission dictates it. I object, I reject this intolerable EU interference and I therefore reject this directive."@sl20
"Herr talman! Jag vill framföra att jag motsätter mig EU:s inblandning i medlemsstaternas straffrätt så till den milda grad att EU kräver att nya brottsrubriceringar ska införas och dikterar vilken straffnivå som ska gälla i Storbritannien och andra länder. EG-domstolens skamliga beslut från september 2005 har orsakat denna oacceptabla överträdelse mot den nationella suveräniteten. Nu ser vi kommissionen föra en kampanj av ohejdad maktexpansion. Detta direktiv är särskilt förkastligt från Storbritanniens perspektiv eftersom det leder till att patentintrång för första gången blir brottsligt och straffbart med minst fyra års fängelse, inte för att det valda underhuset anser att det är nödvändigt eller klokt, utan för att den icke valda Europeiska kommissionen dikterar det. Jag protesterar! Jag avvisar denna oacceptabla inblandning från EU och därmed även detta direktiv."@sv22
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"Jim Allister (NI ). –"18,5,20,15,1,19,14,16,11,13,4

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Czech.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Danish.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Dutch.ttl.gz
4http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
5http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Estonian.ttl.gz
6http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
7http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Finnish.ttl.gz
8http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/French.ttl.gz
9http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/German.ttl.gz
10http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Greek.ttl.gz
11http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Hungarian.ttl.gz
12http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Italian.ttl.gz
13http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Latvian.ttl.gz
14http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Lithuanian.ttl.gz
15http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Maltese.ttl.gz
16http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Polish.ttl.gz
17http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Portuguese.ttl.gz
18http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Romanian.ttl.gz
19http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Slovak.ttl.gz
20http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Slovenian.ttl.gz
21http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Spanish.ttl.gz
22http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Swedish.ttl.gz
23http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph