Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-10-Speech-2-326-250"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-05-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"lt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110510.60.2-326-250"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-05-10-Speech-2-327-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Juozas Imbrasas2
lpv:spokenAs	member; TRAN (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; EFD (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Partija Tvarka ir teisingumas (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Korean Peninsula (2009-09-16--2012-02-14)3 member; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"I endorsed this report, because Article 8 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union was not invoked by Bruno Gollnisch in his request for defence of immunity and it is not applicable in this case. In order to decide whether or not to defend parliamentary immunity, Parliament applies its own consistent principles. The Committee responsible has found no evidence of a sufficiently serious and precise suspicion that the case has been brought with the intention of causing political damage to the Member. Secondly, the case does not come within the scope of Bruno Gollnisch's political activities as member of the European Parliament. It concerns instead activities of a purely regional and local nature of Bruno Gollnisch as regional councillor for Rhône-Alpes, a mandate which is distinct from that of a Member of the European Parliament. Thirdly, Bruno Gollnisch has given an explanation of the publication of the incriminated press release by his political group in the Rhône-Alpes Regional Council, stating that it had been written by the Front National team in that region, including its head of communications. The application of parliamentary immunity to such a situation is considered to constitute an undue extension of those rules, which are intended to avoid any interference with the functioning and independence of Parliament. Finally, it is not for Parliament but for the competent judicial authorities to decide, whilst respecting all democratic guarantees, to what extent French law on incitement to racial hatred has been broken and what the judicial consequences might be. Having considered all the arguments, the Committee on Legal Affairs recommends that the European Parliament should waive the parliamentary immunity of Bruno Gollnisch."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph