Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-13-Speech-3-230"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020313.10.3-230"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I represent the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market as rapporteur for the Directive on market abuse. We of course primarily tried during our discussions to make sure that what emerges here goes as far as possible to ensure that the directive is legally correct. The main problem we faced was the issue of comitology. The original draft directive provided a very general definition of market abuse, beyond which the bulk of the detail, the actual definitions, are relegated to the Annex and made accessible to the comitology process. We are convinced that criminal law – and we are talking about criminal law here – can only be adopted by the actual legislature and not through the comitology process.
That is why in the first place we are very grateful that the rapporteur of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and also that committee as a whole adopted changes in order to move in the direction requested by the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market.
The second legal aspect which is vital here is that although we have some sympathy for the fact that the Commission attempted to adopt a result-oriented rather than a blame-oriented approach, it is a problem for us – and this is a general legal principle – that without blame, without guilt, no penal sanctions can be applied. If that approach were to be adopted, it would fly in the face of all the fundamental rights provisions that have become part of the traditional order in our Member States, and it would also be counter to the Charter of Fundamental Rights adopted in Nice. So without any guilt whatsoever it is impossible to apply such sanctions.
We also considered the degree of guilt. It is our opinion that market abuse is an offence very similar to other offences against property, such as fraud. However, there is no such thing as negligent fraud or negligent theft. Such offences can only be committed intentionally. For this reason it was one of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market's wishes that intent should also be included as a matter of principle.
We are very grateful to the rapporteur for his willingness, in a spirit of compromise, to incorporate these points from the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market into his draft. It now only remains for us to make an appeal to the Council that when it makes its decision it should take account of fundamental rights. This appeal is, for very good reasons, particularly directed to the Finance Ministers, who are responsible for this."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples