Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-14-Speech-3-133"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060614.13.3-133"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The report concerns the consequences of the European Court of Justice’s judgment C-176/03, which gave the EU powers to adopt, under the first pillar, necessary sanctions under criminal law in order to guarantee that full effect is given to the provisions of the first pillar, in this case in relation to the environment.
The EC Treaty does not, however, contain any explicit allocation of authority in the matter of criminal law. In view of the considerable importance criminal law has for the sovereignty of the Member States, the implicit transfer of this authority to the Community should not be permitted. What is more, Articles 135 and 280 of the EC Treaty state explicitly that the Member States are responsible for the application of national criminal law and the administration of justice. In spite of this, the Commission has stated that there is no limit to the degree to which criminal law might be brought within the competence of the Community and that, in principle, all the areas regulated by the EC Treaty might be subject to such transfers of authority.
Through the Court of Justice’s interpretation of the Treaties, the pillars are thus combined in a single institutional framework, which was a feature of the now rejected European Constitution. The June List is strongly opposed to this undermining of national self-determination and has thus voted against the report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples