Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-23-Speech-2-376"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101123.33.2-376"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I abstained from the final vote on the Berlinguer resolution because Amendment 2 was thrown out. This was extremely important for ruling out possible erroneous interpretations of item 40, which states that Parliament ‘strongly supports plans to enable the mutual recognition of the effects of civil status documents’. The expression could suggest, for example, a European Union-wide obligation to recognise a union between people of the same sex registered in a Member State where such a union is permitted.
In actual fact, we must distinguish between the effects of a completed legal action (in the case of marriage) and the effects of an official registration document. The latter bears full witness to what is documented (for example, that a homosexual marriage has been entered into in Holland) and this public witness is the effect of the official marital status document. However, the effects of the official registration document are something different and their recognition (for example, a survivor’s pension) is not permitted in a State that does not recognise them. Matters of family law are, in any case, part of the identity of individual states and cannot be touched by EU law. The possibility of a different interpretation led me to choose to abstain."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples