Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-13-Speech-2-207"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010213.9.2-207"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I am very grateful to the honourable Members for their questions about my correspondence with my friend and former colleague, Mrs Anita Gradin, and her former chef de cabinet, Mr Christer Asp. The questions enable me to report publicly and fully to this House on an issue that I know has aroused interest particularly in Sweden.
On 13 November 2000 Danish TV broadcast a documentary programme in which statements were attributed to Mrs Gradin and Mr Asp that appeared to relate to an employee of the Commission who had been unanimously acquitted of specific charges by the last Commission after due disciplinary process had been followed. As a result of that broadcast, and as Commissioner responsible for Personnel and Administration, I was obliged to write to Mrs Gradin and Mr Asp on 22 November to request confirmation and clarification of the reported remarks, in order to enable the Commission to establish whether or not the remarks in question would require any action by the Commission.
That was the sole purpose of the letter. It did not, either in tone or in content, demand explanations, offer criticism, seek to gag anyone or imply in any way that either Mrs Gradin, as a former Commissioner, or Mr Asp, as a former official, had no right to criticise the Commission as an institution. In order to make that absolutely clear, I will readily provide copies of that letter and all other relevant correspondence to the honourable Members as soon as I have confirmation from Mrs Gradin that she has no objection to that course of action. Mrs Gradin has indicated by an indirect route that she would be agreeable to such a release of correspondence but naturally, as a matter of courtesy to her, I prefer to have direct confirmation of her agreement.
Mrs Gradin replied to my 22 November letter on 29 December and I wrote a further letter to her on 25 January 2001. As I pointed out in that letter to Mrs Gradin, and as the House will be aware, the Staff Regulations applicable to all EU institutions make it clear that the Commission as an institution and as an employer is legally liable to assist employees in defending themselves against attack. That obligation also means defending an acquitted person against any questioning of their innocence of the charges on which they were acquitted. My 22 November letters to Mrs Gradin and Mr Asp therefore related entirely to such legal obligations and considerations and to absolutely nothing else.
As I made clear in my letter of 25 January to Mrs Gradin, whilst all liberties of speech are precious and must be upheld, the expression of certain opinions – for instance those that may be considered to defame others – can have legal consequences in all democratic societies, and have specific implications for the Commission as an employing European institution. In that letter I also made clear beyond doubt that my letter of 22 November was not in any way an attempt to limit free comment or to prevent criticism of the Commission either by Mrs Gradin, or indeed by Mr Asp or anyone else.
All this will be evident to honourable Members when they have the chance to read the exchange of correspondence, as I hope they will. That will also enable them to see that the basis for consideration of the actions of former commissioners and former officials is the Treaty and the Staff Regulations. Mrs Gradin has obviously always taken her duty of discretion provided for in the Treaty seriously as a responsible and reputable person. I am sure that will continue."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples