Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-30-Speech-3-204"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051130.18.3-204"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in my opinion – which I think is shared by the vast majority of Parliament – the ruling of the European Court of Justice in Case C-0176 represents a success for the European Parliament, not only because the Court took up the suggestions made by Parliament in September 2003, based on a report by the Committee on Legal Affairs which I have the honour of chairing, but also because it has forced the Council to respect Articles 24, 29 and 47, which clearly state that the Treaty establishing the European Community has precedence over the Treaty on European Union.
For this reason, in the field of criminal sanctions, the Council will no longer be able to use Title VI to make unilateral decisions without the intervention of the European Parliament as colegislator. I believe this to be a great advance and a great result which does credit to the European Union as a whole.
It seems clear that, without the intervention of Parliament, a fundamental principle of democracy, namely
would have been overlooked rather than reaffirmed.
The Court of Justice, whilst recognising, obviously, that the Community cannot establish criminal sanctions or achieve harmonisation of criminal law, has provided that – if criminal sanctions are essential to achieve the requirements or aims of the Treaty – the Community can oblige Member States to provide for them and apply them. This means that if the Community has competence to regulate conduct in order to achieve a particular aim, it also has competence to decide if that conduct may be punished at a national level through recourse to administrative or criminal sanctions.
The European institutions are therefore called upon to carry out the ruling of the Court of Justice and – here I address myself particularly to the Commissioner – the European Commission has given certain indications as to how it will act.
I believe that merely transferring the provisions contained in a framework decision to a community directive is unacceptable if this transfer is not carried out with full respect for the prerogatives of the European Parliament. Parliament must be able to intervene on substance if the legal basis provides that it is colegislator.
As far as the pending legislative proposals are concerned, I am grateful to the Commissioner if the Commission is taking steps to withdraw them or replace them with new proposals consistent with the case-law of the Court.
The Committee on Legal Affairs will continue to see that community law and the prerogatives of Parliament are respected. Very precise guidelines will be laid down in an own-initiative report, for which we have already asked for authorisation in advance, and with which the Committee on Justice will concern itself."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples