natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
På mødet den 18. januar 2007 meddelte Parlamentets formand, at han havde modtaget en anmodning af 9. oktober 2006 fra Rita Caccamo, dommer ved det indledende retsmøde ved retten i Verona (Italien) i forbindelse med straffesag nr. 81/96 R.G.N.R, hvori Europa-Parlamentet blev anmodet om at tage stilling til, hvorvidt parlamentarisk immunitet finder anvendelse på de forhold, Gian Paolo Gobbo er anklaget for.
At the sitting of 18 January 2007, the President of Parliament announced that he had received a request made on 9 October 2006 by Rita Caccamo, judge at the preliminary hearing before the District Court of Verona (Italy) in criminal procedure No. 81/96 R.G.N.R., for a decision of the European Parliament as to whether parliamentary immunity applies to the facts committed by Mr Gian Paolo Gobbo.
Formanden henviste sagen til Retsudvalget, som er det kompetente udvalg i henhold til forretningsordenens artikel 7, stk. 13, og artikel 6, stk. 2.
The President referred the matter to the Committee on Legal affairs, as the committee responsible, in accordance with Rules 7(13) and 6(2) of the Rules of Procedure.
Ifølge den kompetente nationale domstol gik de primære punkter i det oprindelige anklageskrift mod Gobbo ud på, at han, altid i fællesskab med en lang række andre personer,
Initially, according to the competent national court, the main charges against Mr Gobbo were the following: always acting in concert with many other people,
a) havde begået handlinger, der sigtede på at ødelægge den italienske stats enhed gennem løsrivelse fra dens territorium af en nyoprettet stat kaldet "Padania", der skulle have en række repræsentative organer i forskellige lokaliteter med betegnelsen "regering" og "parlament" i "Forbundsrepublikken Padania", ligesom der skulle være en "officiel tidende" indeholdende "de padaniske institutioners retsakter";
a) he committed acts aimed at destroying the unity of the Italian State by dismembering its territory and creating a new state entity under the name of ‘Padania’, with more representative bodies at various locations under the title of ‘government’ and ‘parliament’ of the ‘federal Padanian republic’, followed by the publication of an ‘official gazette’ containing the ‘acts of the Padanian institutions’;
b) efter flere forsøg på at opnå international anerkendelse af denne nye kunstige statsdannelse havde udskrevet "padaniske valg" og opfordret alle italienske statsborgere med bopæl i Norditalien til at vælge repræsentanter til det såkaldte "padaniske parlament",
b) after various attempts at obtaining international recognition for this new and artificially created entity, he called ‘Padanian elections’, urging all Italian citizens residing in northern Italy to vote for representatives to the so-called ‘Padanian parliament’;
c) havde udført handlinger, der sigtede på at ændre statens forfatning og den måde, hvorpå den udøver suverænitet,
c) he performed actions aimed at changing the constitution of the State and the means whereby it exercises sovereignty;
d) havde været medstifter af, ledet og deltaget i en paramilitær organisation med politiske mål, kaldet "Camicie Verdi" ("Grønskjorter"), som senere fusionerede med en anden, mere kompleks organisation kendt som "Den Padaniske Nationalgarde" (GNP), der var organiseret i henhold til præcise regler for optagelse og rekruttering af medlemmer - som alle blev udstyret med uniform - og på grundlag af en række hierarkisk opbyggede territoriale enheder med særligt udpegede lokale kommandører, der havde strenge pålæg om at efterkomme instrukserne fra "lederen" eller dennes udpegede repræsentanter og aflægge regelmæssige rapporter om de foranstaltninger, der var truffet til at efterkomme disse instrukser; den pågældende organisation stod i tæt forbindelse med den politiske bevægelse "Lega Nord" og skulle bidrage til implementeringen og opnåelsen af bevægelsens erklærede politiske mål, nemlig oprettelse af nye statsenheder (og samtidig i visse henseender fungere som disses politi- og militærstyrker) ved at skabe en hierarkisk organisation, der var trænet i at foretage kollektive aktioner af voldelig eller truende karakter (selv om de blev fremstillet som et legitimt forsvar for rettigheder, der angiveligt var blevet krænket) og desuden blev brugt til at intimidere medlemmer af bevægelsen, som modsatte sig de politiske direktiver fra dens ledere, og forhindre dem i at skabe intern debat i bevægelsen, hvorved organisationen bidrog til at gennemtvinge en bestemt politisk linje i "Lega Nord" ved at bringe enhver intern kritik til tavshed,
d) finally, he promoted, set up, led and participated in a paramilitary association with political objectives, under the title of ‘the Greenshirts’, which later amalgamated with another, more complex structure known as the ‘Padanian national guard’ (GNP), which was organised in accordance with precise rules on the admission and recruitment of members – all of whom were issued with uniforms – and on the basis of a number of hierarchically organised territorial units, with local commanders being appointed and required to comply strictly with instructions from the ‘leader’ or persons delegated by him and report periodically on the actions taken in compliance with those instructions; the association in question was close to the ‘Lega Nord’ political movement and was intended to help implement and achieve the movement’s proclaimed political objectives of creating new state entities (while itself acting, in some respects, as the their police and military force) through the setting-up of a hierarchically organised body which was trained to take collective action of a violent or threatening nature (albeit presented as the legitimate defence of rights which had allegedly been violated) and was also used to intimidate any members of the movement who were opposed to the political directives issued by its leaders and prevent them from engaging in debate inside the movement, thus helping to impose a definite political line on the Legal Nord movement by silencing any expression of dissent within it.
Eftersom nogle af de andre anklagede i samme sag var medlemmer af det italienske parlaments to kamre, blev disse bedt om at fremkomme med en vurdering af, om de pågældende kun var fremkommet med meningsytringer som led i udøvelsen af deres parlamentariske arbejde, og om den (nationale) absolutte immunitet derfor fandt anvendelse.
Since some of the accused for the same charges were members of the two Chambers of the national Parliament, the latter were asked to judge whether they were only expressing their opinion in the performance of their parliamentary duties and whether (national) absolute immunity was therefore applicable.
Den 31. januar 2001 udtalte det italienske Senat, at de forhold, de pågældende var anklaget for, blot var " et bizart forsøg på at henlede opmærksomheden på nogle politiske forslag, som indgik i normal parlamentarisk virksomhed ", og at de simpelt hen bestod af nogle " uortodokse metoder til at gøre reklame for institutionelle aktiviteter".
On 31 January 2001, the Italian Senate stated that the incriminated behaviour was just "the bizarre attempt to draw some attention to political proposals which were the subject of proper parliamentary activity" and that it simply consisted of "singular mechanisms for propagandising institutional activities".
Det konkluderede derfor, at eftersom " disse opsigtsvækkende og demonstrative handlinger kun kan betragtes som den eksterne projicering af en politisk plan, som var fremført internt i institutionerne, og alene havde til formål at gøre denne plan mere synlig ", var alle de forhold, parlamentsmedlemmerne var anklaget for, dækket af absolut immunitet.
It thus concluded that, as "those emphatic and evocative demonstrations can only be regarded as the external projection of the political plan put forward in the institutions, which was simply designed to make that plan more visible" , all charges against national members were covered by absolute immunity.
Som følge heraf blev alle de anklagede den 5. oktober 2006 frikendt med den begrundelse, at de forhold, de var anklaget for i punkt a), b) og c) i anklageskriftet (se ovenfor), ikke længere var at betragte som strafbare, og at de forhold, de var anklaget for under punkt d), delvis var faldet for forældelsesfristen.
As a consequence, on 5 October 2006, all the accused were acquitted on the grounds that the actions ascribed to them under points a), b) and c) of the request of committal (see above) were no longer classified as offences and the offence with which they were charged under point d) had partly fallen under the statute of limitations.
Ifølge den kompetente domstol drejer retssagen sig derfor nu udelukkende om det tilbageværende forhold under punkt d) i det oprindelige anklageskrift, nemlig overtrædelse af artikel 1 i lovdekret nr. 43/1948 (oprettelse af paramilitær organisation med politiske mål).
According to the competent court, the legal proceeding is solely concerned, therefore, with the remaining charge referred to under the original point d) of the request for committal, namely infringement of Article 1 of legislative decree No 43/1948 (organisation of a paramilitary association with political objectives).
Den 7. marts 2007 vedtog det italienske Deputeretkammer, at de af dets medlemmer, som var involveret i denne retssag, fuldt ud var dækket af absolut immunitet, og at deres adfærd således var at betragte som led i den legitime udøvelse af deres parlamentariske mandat.
On 7 March 2007 the Italian Chamber of Representatives decided that those of its members who were involved in the same proceedings were fully covered by absolute immunity, thus regarding their behaviour as the legitimate exercise of their parliamentary mandate.
RELEVANTE BESTEMMELSER
APPLICABLE PROVISIONS
Artikel 9 og 10 i protokollen vedrørende De Europæiske Fællesskabers privilegier og immuniteter (herefter "protokollen")
Articles 9 and 10 of the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Communities (PPI)
Det er klart, at disse to bestemmelser udelukker hinanden gensidigt.
The two provisions are clearly mutually exclusive.
Som det fremgår af ovenstående, giver artikel 9 i protokollen om privilegier og immuniteter kun Europa-Parlamentets medlemmer fuld beskyttelse mod retsforfølgning i forbindelse med meningstilkendegivelser eller stemmeafgivelser, som de fremkommer med under udøvelsen af deres hverv,
As shown above, Article 9 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities, only accords Members full protection from legal proceedings related to opinions expressed and votes cast by them in the performance of their duties.
Deltagelse i en uniformeret sammenslutning af halvmilitært tilsnit, som øjensynlig gav indtryk af, at den ville søge at nå sine mål gennem trusler om eller faktisk magtanvendelse, er imidlertid i klar modstrid med og uforeneligt med den rolle og det ansvar, der er knyttet til et parlamentarisk mandat, og kan derfor ikke betragtes som en legitim udøvelse af ytringsfriheden eller mere generelt som et led i folkevalgte parlamentarikeres normale udøvelse af deres pligter.
Participating in a semi-military style uniformed association which apparently gave the impression that it would seek to achieve its objectives through the potential or actual use of the force is clearly contradictory and incompatible with the role and the responsibilities of a parliamentary mandate and cannot therefore be regarded as the legitimate exercise of the freedom of speech and, in general, as the normal performance of the duties of members belonging to an elected assembly representing citizens.
Protokollens artikel 9 finder derfor ikke anvendelse.
Article 9 of the Protocol is therefore not applicable.
Hvad angår artikel 10 følger det af det forhold, at anklagerne mod Gobbo vedrører handlinger begået i Italien, hvor han var statsborger på det pågældende tidspunkt, at den eneste del af bestemmelsen, der finder anvendelse, er følgende: " Under Europa-Parlamentets mødeperioder nyder medlemmerne: a) på deres eget lands område de immuniteter, der tilstås medlemmerne af deres lands lovgivende forsamling ".
As for Article 10, given that the charges brought against Mr Gobbo refer to facts committed in Italy, whose citizenship he enjoyed at that moment, the only applicable part is the one pursuant to which " 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 ".
Rækkevidden af den parlamentariske immunitet i Italien er meget lig den, der gælder i henhold til protokollen og som skal sikre, at EP kan fungere.
The scope of the parliamentary immunity in Italy is very similar to the one that serves the functioning of the EP, based on the PPI.
Artikel 68, stk. 1 og 2, i den italienske forfatning lyder som følger:
Article 68, first and second subparagraph, of the Italian Constitution reads as follows:
Med andre ord nyder medlemmer af det italienske parlament i henhold til artikel 68 i den italienske forfatning kun immunitet mod strafforfølgning i forbindelse med meningstilkendegivelser eller stemmeafgivelser, som de foretager under udøvelsen af deres hverv.
In other words, pursuant to Article 68 of the Italian Constitution, members of the national Parliament do not enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution, except for opinions expressed or votes cast by them in the exercise of their functions.
Da der ikke er tale om noget sådant i Gobbos tilfælde, kan retssagen mod ham gå videre.
As this is not the case as regards Mr Gobbo's behaviour, the legal proceedings brought against him can go on.
Det italienske parlaments konklusioner vedrørende den absolutte immunitets anvendelighed på forhold begået af dets egne medlemmer kan naturligvis på ingen måde være bindende for Europa-Parlamentet, der som folkevalgt lovgivende forsamling har absolut suverænitet til at træffe sine afgørelser.
Of course, since the European Parliament, as legislative body elected by direct universal suffrage, enjoys absolute autonomy when taking its decisions, on no account can the conclusions of the Italian Parliament on the applicability of absolute immunity to the facts committed by its own members be binding.
På grundlag af ovenstående betragtninger og efter at have hørt Gobbo og overvejet argumenterne for og imod beskyttelse af hans immunitet, konkluderer Retsudvalget, at parlamentarisk immunitet i henhold til artikel 9 i protokollen af 8. april 1965 vedrørende De Europæiske Fællesskabers privilegier og immuniteter og, i det omfang den finder anvendelse, artikel 68, stk. 1, i den italienske forfatning ikke dækker de forhold, Gian Paolo Gobbo er anklaget for, og vedtager derfor ikke at beskytte hans immunitet og privilegier.
On the basis of the above considerations, the Committee on Legal Affairs, having heard Mr Gobbo and having examined the reasons for and against defending his immunity, considers that parliamentary immunity within the meaning of Article 9 of the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities and, insofar as it is relevant, Article 68, first subparagraph, of the Italian Constitution do not cover the facts committed by Mr Gian Paolo Gobbo and therefore decides not to defend his immunity and privileges.
om ændring af forretningsordenen i lyset af statutten for Europa-Parlamentets medlemmer
on the amendment of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure in the light of the Statute for Members
UDTALELSE fra Retsudvalget .....................................................................................10
OPINION of the Committee on Legal Affairs ......................................................11
– der henviser til formandens skrivelse af 29. juni 2006 og bekendtgørelsen på plenarmødet den 7. september 2006,
– having regard to the letter from its President of 29 June 2006 and the announcement in plenary on 7 September 2006,
– der henviser til betænkning fra Udvalget om Konstitutionelle Anliggender og udtalelse fra Retsudvalget ( A6‑0368/2007 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6‑0368/2007 ),
Artikel 8
Rule 8
Medmindre andet er fastsat, vedtager Præsidiet bestemmelserne til gennemførelse af statutten for Europa-Parlamentets medlemmer.
Unless otherwise stipulated, the rules governing implementation of the Statute for Members shall be laid down by the Bureau.
Artikel 39, stk. 1
Rule 39, paragraph 1
Parlamentet kan anmode Kommissionen om at fremsætte passende forslag med henblik på udstedelse af nye retsakter eller ændring af eksisterende retsakter, jf. EF-traktatens artikel 192, stk. 2, ved at vedtage en beslutning på grundlag af en initiativbetænkning , jf. artikel 45, fra det kompetente udvalg.
Parliament may request the Commission to submit to it any appropriate proposal pursuant to Article 192, second paragraph, of the EC Treaty by adopting a resolution on the basis of an own-initiative report from the committee responsible initiated pursuant to Rule 45 .
Artikel 39, stk. 1 a (nyt)
Rule 39, paragraph 1 a (new)
Artikel 39, stk. 1 b (nyt)
Rule 39, paragraph 1 b (new)
Inden denne henvisning oversættes forslaget til de officielle sprog, som dette udvalgs formand anser for nødvendig til en kortfattet behandling.
Prior to referral, the proposal shall be translated into those official languages which the chairman of that committee regards as necessary to make summary consideration possible.
Inden to måneder efter henvisningen og efter at have hørt forslagets ophavsmand træffer udvalget afgørelse om den videre behandling.
The committee shall take a decision on further action within three months following the referral and after hearing the author of the proposal.
Vedtager udvalget at forelægge Parlamentet forslaget efter proceduren i artikel 45, anføres forslagets ophavsmand med navns nævnelse i betænkningens titel.
Where the committee decides to submit the proposal to Parliament pursuant to the procedure under Rule 45, the author of the proposal shall be named in the title of the report.
Artikel 39, stk. 2
Rule 39, paragraph 2
a) at et sådant forslag ikke er omtalt i årsprogrammet for lovgivningen,
(a) such a proposal is not included in the Annual Legislative Programme;
b) at forberedelsen af et sådant forslag ikke er påbegyndt eller trækker urimeligt længe ud, eller
(b) the preparations of such a proposal have not started or are unduly delayed;
c) at Kommissionen ikke har reageret positivt på tidligere anmodninger fremsat af det kompetente udvalg eller i beslutninger, som Parlamentet har vedtaget med et flertal af de afgivne stemmer.
(c) the Commission has not responded positively to earlier requests either from the committee responsible or contained in resolutions adopted by Parliament with a majority of the votes cast.
Omhandler en betænkning et forslag, der er fremsat af et medlem i henhold til artikel 39, stk. 1a, kan tilladelse kun nægtes, hvis betingelserne i artikel 5 i statutten for Europa-Parlamentets medlemmer samt i EF-traktatens artikel 192 ikke er opfyldt.
Where the subject of the report is a proposal tabled by a Member pursuant to Rule 39(1a), authorisation may be withheld only if the conditions set out in Article 5 of the Statute for Members of the European Parliament and Article 192 of the EC Treaty are not met.
Artikel 150, stk. 6, afsnit 1
Rule 150, paragraph 6, subparagraph 1
Parlamentet undlader at træffe afgørelser, som ville betyde en urimelig diskriminering af medlemmer, der benytter et bestemt sprog.
Parliament shall avoid taking decisions which would lead to Members who use a given language being disadvantaged to an unacceptable degree.
Bilag I, artikel 2, stk. 1, litra aa (nyt)
Annex I, Article 2, paragraph 1, letter aa (new)
(aa) vederlag, som de modtager for at udøve et mandat i et andet parlament
(aa) any remuneration which the Member receives for the exercise of a mandate in another parliament,
Bilag I, artikel 4
Annex I, Article 4
Indtil der foreligger en statut for Europa-Parlamentets medlemmer, som kan træde i stedet for de forskellige nationale regler, er medlemmerne, for så vidt angår afgivelse af oplysninger om formueforhold, underkastet lovgivningen i den medlemsstat, hvor de er valgt.
Pending the introduction of a Statute for Members of the European Parliament to replace the various national rules, Members shall be subject to the obligations imposed on them by the legislation of the Member State in which they are elected as regards the declaration of assets.
Bilag VII, del C a (ny)
Annex VII, Section C a (new)
Med Præsidiets samtykke kan et medlem med en begrundet afgørelse nægtes indsigt i et parlamentsdokument, hvis Præsidiet efter at have hørt medlemmet er af den overbevisning, at en sådan aktindsigt ville være til uacceptabel skade for Parlamentets institutionelle interesser eller offentlighedens interesser, og at medlemmet ønsker denne aktindsigt ud fra private og personlige motiver .
With the approval of the Bureau, a Member may, on the basis of a reasoned decision, be denied the right to inspect a Parliament document if, after hearing the Member concerned, the Bureau comes to the conclusion that such inspection would cause unacceptable damage to Parliament’s institutional interests or the public interest and that the Member concerned is seeking to inspect the document for private and personal reasons.
Medlemmet kan inden en måned efter fremsendelsen af en sådan afgørelse indgive en skriftlig klage herover, som skal begrundes.
The Member may lodge a written appeal, which must include reasons, against such a decision within a month of its transmission.
Parlamentet træffer afgørelsen om klagen uden forhandling under den første mødeperiode efter klagens indgivelse.
Parliament shall reach a decision on the appeal without debate during the part ‑session that follows its being lodged.
Ændringsforslag 1 - Forretningsordenens artikel 8 svarer i sin nuværende udformning ikke til den retssituation, der vil herske, når medlemsstatutten er trådt i kraft.
Amendment 1 - The current wording of Rule 8 of the Rules of Procedure is no longer consistent with the legal situation which will obtain following the entry into force of the Statute for Members.
Fra det tidspunkt vil reglerne for omkostningsgodtgørelser og andre godtgørelser til medlemmerne tage udgangspunkt i medlemsstatuttens artikel 9-23, 27 og 28 og ikke længere i Parlamentets ret til selvorganisation, jf. EF-traktatens artikel 199.
From that moment on, the rules governing the reimbursement of Members’ expenses and Members’ allowances will no longer be based on Parliament’s right of administrative autonomy, pursuant to Article 199 of the EC Treaty, but instead on Articles 9 to 23, 27 and 28 of the Statute for Members.
Det vil være hensigtsmæssigt fortsat at lade Præsidiet vedtage gennemførelsesbestemmelser om sådanne spørgsmål.
It makes sense that implementing decisions concerning such matters should continue to be taken by the Bureau.
Med den foreslåede nye udformning af artikel 8 får Præsidiet overdraget kompetence til at fastsætte sådanne regler.
The proposed new wording of Rule 8 will grant the Bureau corresponding regulatory powers.
Den kompetence, Præsidiet i henhold til artikel 22, stk. 2, har i finansielle, organisatoriske og administrative spørgsmål vedrørende medlemmerne, er fortsat formålstjenlig, fordi den vedrører det politiske ansvar for bestemmelsernes gennemførelse i hvert enkelt tilfælde.
The competence to take financial, organisational and administrative decisions on matters concerning Members conferred on the Bureau by Rule 22(2) should be retained, since it concerns political responsibility for the implementation of the rules in individual cases.
Ændringsforslag 3-6 - Formålet med den foreslåede ændring er at gennemføre den individuelle ret for ethvert medlem til som led i Parlamentets initiativret at fremsætte forslag til en fællesskabsretsakt, således som det fastsættes i medlemsstatuttens artikel 5.
Amendments 3-6 - The aim of the proposed amendments is to make practical arrangements for the exercise of the individual right, granted to every Member by Article 4 of the Statute for Members, to table proposals for Community acts in the context of Parliament’s right of initiative.