Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-27-Speech-4-057"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030327.2.4-057"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Theato report on the Commission’s Green Paper on the protection of Community financial interests and on the creation of a European Public Prosecutor has had a lot of preparation and a long debate. At the beginning, we agreed on this, provided that the office of Prosecutor remained, and still remains limited, precisely, to the financial interests of the Community. During the debate and the assessments made by the Parliamentary committees however, the original measure was in danger of being distorted and taking on a different, dangerous form in the European institutional context. This is why the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, early on, prepared a negative opinion but, subsequently, following intelligent steps by Mr Lehne and explanations from the Chairman, Mrs Theato, it set out a compromise opinion and tried to bring the institution which we want to regulate back towards the original suggestion. Further discussions with Mrs Theato enabled us to reach a united, compromise position, which we hope will be endorsed in the Chamber this morning. With great sensitivity, Mrs Theato took this issue on herself because, in actual fact, the European Union’s legal system does not provide for competences in the field of criminal law and criminal procedural law, or a judiciary endowed with all the degrees of adjudication able to guarantee the full right of defence. In the absence of such conditions, the creation of an independent European Public Prosecutor without any controls would damage, Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the already fragile interinstitutional balance between the Union and the States in an area as sensitive as justice: it would therefore be illogical and unjustified. In particular, the creation of such a body would seem truly premature if we consider that we have not yet attained the objectives on judicial cooperation, let alone, where necessary, on the harmonisation of the rules on Member States’ criminal-law issues.
It is in the context of Eurojust – this certainly does have a subsidiarity problem and a major problem with coordinating the European States – and in this context alone that we can truly achieve a significant, uniform result which respects the States and at the same time provides the guarantees which the European Union must have. This is how we are going to vote, and we will table these amendments to the Convention, which obviously cannot incorporate a European Prosecutor, an unrestricted super-prosecutor, which would run counter to all the guarantees which nevertheless exist in Europe."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples