EΚΘΕΣΗ. EL Eνωµένη στην πολυµορφία EL A7-0236/ σχετικά µε την αίτηση άρσης της ασυλίας της Marine Le Pen (2012/2325(IMM))

Transcript

1 ΕΥΡΩΠΑΪΚΟ ΚΟΙΝΟΒΟΥΛΙΟ Έγγραφο συνόδου A7-0236/2013 EΚΘΕΣΗ σχετικά µε την αίτηση άρσης της ασυλίας της Marine Le Pen (2012/2325(IMM)) Επιτροπή Νοµικών Θεµάτων Εισηγήτρια: Cecilia Wikström RR\ doc PE v02-00 Eνωµένη στην πολυµορφία

2 PR_IMM_art6-2 ΠΕΡΙΕΧΟΜΕΝΑ Σελίδα ΠΡΟΤΑΣΗ ΑΠΟΦΑΣΗΣ ΤΟΥ ΕΥΡΩΠΑΪΚΟΥ ΚΟΙΝΟΒΟΥΛΙΟΥ... 3 ΑΙΤΙΟΛΟΓΙΚΗ ΕΚΘΕΣΗ... 5 ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΣΜΑ ΤΗΣ ΤΕΛΙΚΗΣ ΨΗΦΟΦΟΡΙΑΣ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗ... 9 PE v /9 RR\ doc

3 ΠΡΟΤΑΣΗ ΑΠΟΦΑΣΗΣ ΤΟΥ ΕΥΡΩΠΑΪΚΟΥ ΚΟΙΝΟΒΟΥΛΙΟΥ σχετικά µε την αίτηση άρσης της ασυλίας της Marine Le Pen (2012/2325(IMM)) Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, έχοντας υπόψη την αίτηση για την άρση της ασυλίας της Marine Le Pen, που διαβιβάστηκε στις 26 Νοεµβρίου 2012 από τον Υπουργό ικαιοσύνης της Γαλλικής ηµοκρατίας σε σχέση µε αίτηση, µε ηµεροµηνία 7 Νοεµβρίου 2012, του Προϊσταµένου της Εισαγγελίας Εφετών της Λυών, και ανακοινώθηκε σε συνεδρίαση της Ολοµέλειας στις 10 εκεµβρίου 2012, έχοντας ακούσει τον Bruno Gollnisch ΒΕΚ εξ ονόµατος της Marine Le Pen, σύµφωνα µε το άρθρο 7 παράγραφος 3 του Κανονισµού του, έχοντας υπόψη τα άρθρα 8 και 9 του Πρωτοκόλλου αριθ. 7 περί των προνοµίων και ασυλιών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, και το άρθρο 6 παράγραφος 2 της Πράξης της 20ής Σεπτεµβρίου 1976 περί της εκλογής των αντιπροσώπων στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο µε άµεση και καθολική ψηφοφορία, έχοντας υπόψη τις αποφάσεις του ικαστηρίου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης της 12ης Μαΐου 1964, της 10ης Ιουλίου 1986, της 15ης και 21ης Οκτωβρίου 2008, της 19ης Μαρτίου 2010, της 6ης Σεπτεµβρίου 2011 και της 17ης Ιανουαρίου , έχοντας υπόψη το άρθρο 26 του Συντάγµατος της Γαλλικής ηµοκρατίας, έχοντας υπόψη το άρθρο 6 παράγραφος 2 και το άρθρο 7 του Κανονισµού του, έχοντας υπόψη την έκθεση της Επιτροπής Νοµικών Θεµάτων (Α7-0236/2013), A. λαµβάνοντας υπόψη ότι ο Προϊστάµενος της Εισαγγελίας Εφετών της Λυών ζήτησε την άρση της βουλευτικής ασυλίας της Marine Le Pen, βουλευτή του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, σε σχέση µε δικαστική δίωξη που αφορά εικαζόµενο αδίκηµα B. λαµβάνοντας υπόψη το άρθρο 9 του Πρωτοκόλλου αριθ. 7 περί των προνοµίων και ασυλιών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης που ορίζει ότι τα µέλη απολαύουν, εντός της επικρατείας των κρατών τους, των ασυλιών που αναγνωρίζονται στα µέλη του Κοινοβουλίου της χώρας τους Γ. λαµβάνοντας υπόψη το άρθρο 26 του Συντάγµατος της Γαλλικής ηµοκρατίας όπου δηλώνεται ότι τα µέλη του Γαλλικού Κοινοβουλίου δεν δύναται να διωχθούν λόγω 1 Υπόθεση 101/63 Wagner κατά Fohrmann και Krier, Συλλογή 1964, σ. 195, υπόθεση 149/85 Wybot κατά Faure και άλλων, Συλλογή 1986, σ. 2391, υπόθεση T-345/05 Mote κατά Κοινοβουλίου, Συλλογή 2008, σ. II-2849, συνεκδικασθείσες υποθέσεις C-200/07 και C-201/07 Marra κατά De Gregorio και Clemente Συλλογή 2008, σ. I- 7929, υπόθεση T-42/06 Gollnisch κατά Κοινοβουλίου (δεν δηµοσιεύθηκε ακόµη στη Συλλογή), υπόθεση C- 163/10 Patriciello (δεν δηµοσιεύθηκε ακόµη στη Συλλογή) και συνεκδικασθείσες υποθέσεις T-346/11 και T- 347/11 Gollnisch κατά Κοινοβουλίου Συλλογή 2010, σ. II RR\ doc 3/9 PE v02-00

4 γνώµης ή ψήφου τις οποίες έδωσαν κατά την εκτέλεση των καθηκόντων τους. λαµβάνοντας υπόψη ότι η Marine Le Pen κατηγορείται για υποκίνηση µίσους, διακρίσεων ή βίας κατά οµάδας προσώπων λόγω του θρησκεύµατός τους, αδίκηµα που προβλέπεται στο γαλλικό δίκαιο, και ιδίως στο άρθρο 24 παράγραφος 8, το άρθρο 23 παράγραφος 1 και το άρθρο 42 της Πράξης της 29ης Ιουλίου 1881 και στο άρθρο 93 παράγραφος 3 της Πράξης της 29ης Ιουλίου 1982, για το οποίο οι κυρώσεις καθορίζονται στο άρθρο 24 παράγραφοι 8, 10, 11 και 12, της Πράξης της 29ης Ιουλίου 1881, και στο άρθρο (2) και (3) του Ποινικού Κώδικα E. λαµβάνοντας υπόψη ότι η εικαζόµενη πράξη δεν τελεί σε άµεση ή προφανή συνάρτηση µε την άσκηση των καθηκόντων της Marine Le Pen υπό την ιδιότητά της ως βουλευτή του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου, ούτε συνιστά γνώµη εκφρασθείσα ή ψήφο δοθείσα κατά την άσκηση των καθηκόντων της, υπό την έννοια του άρθρου 8 του Πρωτοκόλλου αριθ. 7 περί των προνοµίων και ασυλιών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης ΣΤ. λαµβάνοντας υπόψη ότι η κατηγορία δεν συναρτάται µε την ιδιότητα της Marine Le Pen ως βουλευτή του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου Ζ. λαµβάνοντας υπόψη ότι δεν υφίστανται υπόνοιες ύπαρξης fumus persecutionis 1. αποφασίζει να άρει την ασυλία της Marine Le Pen 2. αναθέτει στον Πρόεδρό του να διαβιβάσει αµέσως την παρούσα απόφαση και την έκθεση της αρµόδιας επιτροπής του στο Υπουργείο ικαιοσύνης της Γαλλικής ηµοκρατίας και στην Marine Le Pen. PE v /9 RR\ doc

5 ΑΙΤΙΟΛΟΓΙΚΗ ΕΚΘΕΣΗ 1. Background At the sitting of 10 December 2012, the President announced, under Rule 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure, that he had received a request from the Office of the Chief Prosecutor at the Lyon Court of Appeal to waive the parliamentary immunity of Marine Le Pen. The President referred the request to the Committee on Legal Affairs under Rule 6(2). Ms Le Pen is accused of incitement to hatred, discrimination or violence against a group of persons on grounds of their religious affiliation, i.e. an offence provided for in Article 24, paragraph 8, Article 23, paragraph 1 and Article 42 of the Act of 29 July 1881 and Article 93-3 of Act of 29 July 1982, the penalties for which are laid down in Article 24, paragraphs 8, 10, 11 and 12 of the Act of 29 July 1881 and Article (2) and (3) of the Criminal Code. 2. Law and procedure on the immunity of Members of the European Parliament Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the immunities and privileges of the European Union read as follows: Article 8 Members of the European Parliament shall not be subject to any form of inquiry, detention or legal proceedings in respect of opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the performance of their duties. Article 9 During the sessions of the European Parliament, its Members shall enjoy: (a) in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament; (b) in the territory of any other Member State, immunity from any measure of detention and from legal proceedings. Immunity shall likewise apply to Members while they are travelling to and from the place of meeting of the European Parliament. Immunity cannot be claimed when a Member is found in the act of committing an offence and shall not prevent the European Parliament from exercising its right to waive the immunity of one of its Members. Article 26 1 of the French Constitution provides as follows: No Member of Parliament shall be subject to legal proceedings, investigations, 1 Article amended by Constitutional Law No of 4 August RR\ doc 5/9 PE v02-00

6 arrest, detention or judgment for opinions expressed or votes cast by him while carrying out his duties. No Member of Parliament may be arrested or subject to any other measure depriving the Member of freedom or restricting that freedom for criminal or minor offences without the authorisation of the Assembly to which he belongs, except in the case of a crime or flagrante delicto or of final sentence. Detention, measures depriving the Member of his freedom or restricting that freedom or the prosecution of the Member of Parliament shall be suspended during the session if the Assembly of which he is a Member so demands. The Assembly concerned shall meet automatically for additional sittings to enable, where appropriate, the provisions of the preceding paragraph to be applied. Rules 6 and 7 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament read as follows: Rule 6 Waiver of immunity 1. In the exercise of its powers in respect of privileges and immunities, Parliament shall seek primarily to uphold its integrity as a democratic legislative assembly and to secure the independence of its Members in the performance of their duties. 2. Any request addressed to the President by a competent authority of a Member State that the immunity of a Member be waived shall be announced in Parliament and referred to the committee responsible. [...] Rule 7 Procedures on immunity 1. The committee responsible shall consider without delay and in the order in which they have been submitted requests for the waiver of immunity or requests for the defence of immunity and privileges. 2. The committee shall make a proposal for a reasoned decision which recommends the adoption or rejection of the request for the waiver of immunity or for the defence of immunity and privileges. 3. The committee may ask the authority concerned to provide any information or explanation which the committee deems necessary in order for it to form an opinion on whether immunity should be waived or defended. The Member concerned shall be given an opportunity to be heard, may present any documents or other written evidence deemed by that Member to be relevant and may be represented by another Member. [...] 7. The committee may offer a reasoned opinion as to the competence of the authority in question and the admissibility of the request, but shall not, under any circumstances, PE v /9 RR\ doc

7 [...] pronounce on the guilt or otherwise of the Member nor on whether or not the opinions or acts attributed to him or her justify prosecution, even if, in considering the request, it acquires detailed knowledge of the facts of the case. 11. The committee shall treat these matters and handle any documents received with the utmost confidentiality. 3. Justification for the proposed decision The Office of the Chief Prosecutor at the Lyon Court of Appeal has requested the waiver of the parliamentary immunity of a Member of the European Parliament, Marine Le Pen, with regard to possible legal action concerning an alleged offence of incitement to hatred, discrimination or violence against a group of persons on grounds of their religious affiliation. The case is based on the following facts. During a public meeting of supporters of Front National held on 10 December 2010 in Lyon, Marine Le Pen made a speech that was broadcast on the radio and reported in the press. The meeting was held and the speech was made in the course of an electoral campaign for the office of President of Front National, a post to which Ms Le Pen was elected and which she took up on 16 January The speech included the following statements, which constitute the ground of the accusation of incitement to hatred, discrimination or violence against a group of persons on grounds of their religious affiliation: Fifteen years ago, we started seeing veils on our streets; more and more veils. Then we started seeing burqas: more and more burqas. After that came prayers in the streets (...) and now there are 10 to 15 locations in which people gather, taking over our public space (...). I m sorry, but some people are very fond of talking about the Second World War and about the occupation, so let s talk about occupation, because that is what is happening here (...). There are no tanks, no soldiers, but it is still an occupation, and it weighs on people. The current judicial investigation was opened by the Public Prosecutor in Lyon on 13 January 2012 in response to a complaint with suit for damages in criminal proceedings dated 1 December 2011 brought by the Association de défense des droits de l homme. The complaint was filed in response to the Lyon Public Prosecutor s decision to discontinue the preliminary investigation he had carried out in response to ordinary complaints submitted to him in connection with the same matter. The investigating judge summoned Marine Le Pen to appear on 12 October Ms Le Pen s lawyer stated that she would not appear before the judge, invoking her parliamentary immunity. The same day, the investigating judge forwarded the case file to the prosecution service asking for a request to be made for Ms Le Pen s immunity to be waived, so that she might be interviewed, with a warrant being issued for this purpose if necessary. According to Article 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, Members shall enjoy, in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of the Parliament of that State. Article 26 of the French Constitution provides that a member of parliament cannot be subject to legal proceedings for opinions expressed or votes cast by him while carrying out his duties. A decision of this Parliament is therefore required if the prosecution of Ms Le Pen is to go ahead. RR\ doc 7/9 PE v02-00

8 The scope of immunity accorded to members of the French Parliament corresponds in fact to the scope of immunity accorded to Members under Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union and covers opinions expressed by him while carrying out his duties. As the Court of Justice has held: a statement made by a Member of the European Parliament beyond the precincts of that institution and giving rise to prosecution in his Member State of origin for the offence of making false accusations does not constitute an opinion expressed in the performance of his parliamentary duties covered by the immunity afforded by that provision unless that statement amounts to a subjective appraisal having a direct, obvious connection with the performance of those duties 1 (emphasis added). The Court has also recently recalled its case-law in the Gollnisch case 2 according to which the opinion (in the broadest sense) of an MEP is covered by immunity established on the basis of EU law only where it was expressed in the performance of [his duties], thus implying the requirement of a link between the opinion expressed and the performance of the parliamentary duties. That link must be direct and obvious. On the basis of the facts of the present case there are no grounds for establishing the required direct and obvious link. The case does not fall within the scope of Marine Le Pen s political activities as Member of the European Parliament as it concerns instead activities of a purely national or regional nature given that the speech was made to electors in Lyon as part of her campaign to be elected president of Front National and was thus distinct from her activity of Member of the European Parliament. The alleged action does not therefore have a direct, obvious connection with Marine Le Pen s performance of her duties as a Member of the European Parliament nor does it constitute an opinion expressed in the performance of her duties as a Member of the European Parliament for the purposes of Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union. The accusation has no connection with Ms Le Pen s office of Member of the European Parliament. Marine Le Pen has been given an opportunity to be heard in accordance with Rule 7(3) of the Parliament s Rules of Procedure and, in accordance with the same rule, a representative of Ms Le Pen, Bruno Gollnisch, spoke on her behalf, and based on the explanations given there is no reason to suspect the existence of a fumus persecutionis. 4. Conclusion On the basis of the above considerations, after considering the reasons for and against waiving the Member s immunity, it is recommended that the European Parliament should waive the parliamentary immunity of Marine Le Pen. 1 Patriciello, cited above, in the operative part and at paragraph Joined Cases T-346/11 and T-347/11 Bruno Gollnisch v Parliament, cited above. PE v /9 RR\ doc

9 ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΣΜΑ ΤΗΣ ΤΕΛΙΚΗΣ ΨΗΦΟΦΟΡΙΑΣ ΣΤΗΝ ΕΠΙΤΡΟΠΗ Ηµεροµηνία έγκρισης Αποτέλεσµα της τελικής ψηφοφορίας +: : 0: Βουλευτές παρόντες κατά την τελική ψηφοφορία Αναπληρωτής(ές) παρών(όντες) κατά την τελική ψηφοφορία Raffaele Baldassarre, Luigi Berlinguer, Françoise Castex, Marielle Gallo, Giuseppe Gargani, Sajjad Karim, Klaus-Heiner Lehne, Antonio Masip Hidalgo, Jiří Maštálka, Bernhard Rapkay, Francesco Enrico Speroni, Dimitar Stoyanov, Rebecca Taylor, Cecilia Wikström, Tadeusz Zwiefka Eva Lichtenberger RR\ doc 9/9 PE v02-00