Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-15-Speech-3-090"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041215.3.3-090"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"It has become perfectly clear that these are not points of order, but rather explanations of the attitudes of each Member towards the issue we are dealing with and I therefore see no need or reason to continue giving the floor for points of order.
With regard to how the vote will be taken, I must inform the honourable Members that I have decided that we shall use the electronic procedure in accordance with Rule 161(1) and there is, therefore, no reason to designate a college of tellers. It shall be secret, but electronic.
Having said that, we shall begin the votes.
:
Nevertheless, we must organise our work and we must, of course, do so in accordance with the Rules of Procedure, which sometimes lend themselves to interpretations that must be clarified, as in this case.
The Presidency has received three requests for secret ballots presented in accordance with Rule 162(2) of the Rules of Procedure, which says, and I quote – I will do so in Spanish and naturally it will have to be translated: ‘Voting may also be by secret ballot if requested by at least one-fifth of the component Members of Parliament. Such requests must be made before voting begins.’
With regard to the application of this provision, in this case, having heard those Members who have spoken under the guise of points of order and naturally having sought the opinion and the advice of the legal services of the House and the General Secretariat, which I am obliged to do, I can tell you the following: firstly, that the competent services have confirmed to me that these requests have been endorsed by a sufficient number of Members and that they have in fact been presented on time. Secondly, we have the issue, that some of you have raised, of the interpretation of whether or not we are obliged to hold a secret ballot, since Rule 162(2), which has been mentioned so often this morning, says that ‘voting may also be by secret ballot’ rather than ‘voting will also be’. There is, therefore, room for interpretation of what the Rules of Procedure say.
Aware that this issue would be subject to debate, before this sitting, the Presidency studied the relevant precedents and judgments of the Court of Justice and, regardless of my own personal views on how things should be done, my obligation is to try to interpret the Rules of Procedure in a manner which is as close as possible to the Law and, to this end, I must point out to the House that there is the precedent of President Cox considering, in the meeting of 12 June 2002, that the term ‘may be secret’ implied that the proposal should automatically be accepted and that, if a sufficient number of Members requested it, their request should be granted.
Furthermore, the Court of First Instance of the European Communities issued a judgment in October 2001 in which it also interpreted the term ‘may’ or ‘can’ as an obligatory condition in relation to a Rule of Procedure similar to the one we are dealing with now.
In accordance with these precedents and regardless – I would insist – of the opinions of any particular person on whether matters should be done one way or another, the Presidency believes that, since a request has been presented on time and correctly, we must proceed to a secret ballot ...
... although this issue, for future occasions, must be considered by Parliament’s committee responsible for issues relating to Rules of Procedure. We shall probably have to clarify in the future whether or not the Presidency's interpretation is correct, but at this point in the procedure, the Presidency must take responsibility for the decision without having the opportunity to take the advice of the competent committees, and it is my feeling, having heard all the Members and the legal services, that according to a correct interpretation of the Rules of Procedure we must proceed to the secret ballot requested, and that is what we are going to do."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"On Amendment No 71"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples