# CE2012199EN.01019001.xml

| 7.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 199/190 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 199/190

---

Tuesday 8 March 2011Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity of Elmar Brok

P7_TA(2011)0075

European Parliament decision of 8 March 2011 on the request for waiver of the immunity of Elmar Brok (2010/2283(IMM))

2012/C 199 E/26

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity of Elmar Brok, forwarded by the German authorities on 28 September 2010 and announced in plenary sitting on 22 November 2010, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity of Elmar Brok, forwarded by the German authorities on 28 September 2010 and announced in plenary sitting on 22 November 2010,

| — | having heard Elmar Brok in accordance with Rule 7(3) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having heard Elmar Brok in accordance with Rule 7(3) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union of 8 April 1965 and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union of 8 April 1965 and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

| — | having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 12 May 1964 and 10 July 1986 (1), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 12 May 1964 and 10 July 1986 (1),

1

| — | having regard to Article 46 of the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 46 of the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz),

Grundgesetz

| — | having regard to the German Fiscal Code (Abgabenordnung), in particular Section 370 thereof, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the German Fiscal Code (Abgabenordnung), in particular Section 370 thereof,

Abgabenordnung

| — | having regard to Rules 6(2) and 7 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rules 6(2) and 7 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0047/2011), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A7-0047/2011),

| A. | whereas the facts set out in the explanatory statement constitute a clear case of fumus persecutionis; |
| --- | --- |

A.

whereas the facts set out in the explanatory statement constitute a clear case of fumus persecutionis;

fumus persecutionis

| B. | whereas criminal charges have been brought against a well-known political figure in respect of a sum and in circumstances which would, in the case of an ordinary citizen, have attracted merely administrative proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

B.

whereas criminal charges have been brought against a well-known political figure in respect of a sum and in circumstances which would, in the case of an ordinary citizen, have attracted merely administrative proceedings;

| C. | whereas, moreover, the public prosecutor not only sought to withhold knowledge of the charge from Mr Brok on spurious and highly derogatory grounds for no due cause, but also made sure that the case received great publicity in the media, thus inflicting the maximum amount of damage on the Member concerned; |
| --- | --- |

C.

whereas, moreover, the public prosecutor not only sought to withhold knowledge of the charge from Mr Brok on spurious and highly derogatory grounds for no due cause, but also made sure that the case received great publicity in the media, thus inflicting the maximum amount of damage on the Member concerned;

| D. | whereas it is therefore plain that the case is one of fumus persecutionis in that it appears that the proceedings were brought with the sole aim of damaging the reputation of the Member concerned; |
| --- | --- |

D.

whereas it is therefore plain that the case is one of fumus persecutionis in that it appears that the proceedings were brought with the sole aim of damaging the reputation of the Member concerned;

fumus persecutionis

| E. | whereas it would therefore be completely inappropriate to waive the Member’s immunity, |
| --- | --- |

E.

whereas it would therefore be completely inappropriate to waive the Member’s immunity,

| 1. | Decides not to waive the immunity of Elmar Brok; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Decides not to waive the immunity of Elmar Brok;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its competent committee immediately to the appropriate authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision and the report of its competent committee immediately to the appropriate authorities of the Federal Republic of Germany.

---

(1)  See Case 101/63 Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195 and Case 149/85 Wybot v Faure [1986] ECR 2391.

1

Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier

Wybot v Faure

---