natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
De har som formand med rette sagt, at dette ikke er nogen forhandling, men at der skal stilles spørgsmål. Ivjit indlæg til forretningsordenen er, at disse spørgsmål da også må besvares.
This, as I am sure Commissioner Andriessen will appreciate, is a very important matter, because we have some reason to suppose that the findings of the Anglo-French study group are about to be published.
Hvilken tekst har Kommissionen så holdt sig til: den første, den anden eller Parlamentets tekst?
Furthermore we know from the meeting of the Council of Transport Ministers last week that considerable interest — one may even say enthusiasm — was shown by some members of the Council in the setting-up of a common transport infrastructure fund.
Hvilken tekst har man i sidste instans forelagt Rådet?
So we have this urgent matter and we are looking for the paper promised by the Commissioner.
Eu ropa-Parlam en tets forhandlinger
Debates of the European Parliament
Det som retsudvalget på en måde anmoder om i den af mig forelagte betænkning er at fortsætte den rets praksis, Parlamentet har fulgt siden den 9. marts 1982.
Mr Van Minnen. — (NL) Mr President, my point of order goes back to the Commissioner's answer to Mrs Clwyd's question on the British journalists currently being detained in Argentina. As President, you have correctly stated that debates have no place in Question Time to the Commission.
Det er dog logisk, at kommissæren tilføjer, hvorledes han kommer til denne for os ukendte, for os nye og for os — faktisk — glædelige oplysning.
Which text did it finally defend before the Council?
Formanden. — Jeg tvivler på, at Deres bemærkning havde karakter af et indlæg til forretningsordenen, hr. van Minnen.
Mr Andriessen, Member of the Commission. — (NL) Mr President, I hope the House will not hold it against me that I do not have at hand the exact text submitted to the Council but I am prepared to provide the House with a written answer as soon as possible.
Desuden har Kommissionen slet ikke sagt, at de pågældende journalister er lagt i vat. Denne fortolkning af et svar går lidt for vidt. Vil De reagere herpå, hr. Andriessen?
This House adopted a resolution on which the Com mission was requested to take action; the Commissioner has just deemed such action to be superfluous in view of the fact that the journalists in question are being handled with kidgloves.
Det italienske justitsvæsen bebrejder hr. Pannella, at han den 29. marts 1982 i sin egenskab af redaktør for en italiensk publikation har offentliggjort nogle presseartikler.
Mr Martin. — (FR) Mr President, I have noted the information given by the Commission on disaster aid made available since the last part-session.
Hvad disse presseartikler angår, har det italienske justitsvæsen dømt vor kollega, især fordi han har opfordret til nægtelse af militærtjeneste.
In view of the urgency and extreme gravity of the situation, I should like to know what the Commission intends to do to assist the peoples of Lebanon and Palestine who are the victims of savage Israeli aggression. Under the Israeli bombs . . .
Hr. Pannella har anket denne afgørelse, og sagen verserer for øjeblikket for Roms appelret.
President. — Mr Van Minnen, I rather doubt that your remarks have the character of a point of order.
Denne rets statsadvokat har anmodet os om at ophæve hr. Pannellas parlamentariske immunitet, således at han kan retsforfølges i henhold til italiensk lov. Dette er sagens akter.
Furthermore the Commission did not say that the journalists in question were being handled with kidgloves. Such paraphrasing of an answer is carrying things a little too far.
Der blev spurgt om, hvorvidt Kommissionen havde reageret på Parlamentets beslutning.
The question was whether the Commission had taken action on the resolution adopted by Parliament.
Jeg har givet et konkret svar på dette spørgsmål, og jeg forstår derfor ikke, at hr. van Minnen her tager ordet til forretningsordenen.
I have answered that question and I am at a loss to understand why Mr Van Minnen has to make it a point of order.
Formanden. — Fru Clwyd har ordet til forretningsordenen. denen.
President. — I call Mrs Clwyd on a point of order.
Hvad det retslige aspekt angår, vil jeg blot henvise til, at artikel 10 i protokollen vedrørende De europæiske Fællesskabers privilegier og immuniteter indeholder bestemmelser om, at medlemmerne af Forsamlingen under mødeperioderne på deres eget lands område nyder de immuniteter, der tilstås medlemmerne af deres lands lovgivende forsamling, således at forstå, at De europæiske Fællesskabers Domstol har fast slået, at Europa-Parlamentet holder en årlig session, uden hensyntagen til afbrydelser af mødet eller til afbrydelser af sessionerne.
Mrs Vayssade. — (FR) Mr President, I should like to return to the position adopted by the Commission on the action programme and to supplement Mrs Cinciari Rodano's question by asking the Commission to be more specific about the action it proposes to take on Parliament's vote concerning the content of the action programme without simply referring to the Council's proposal adopted on 27 May.
I medfør af Europa-Parlamentets retspraksis nyder hr. Pannella den immunitet, der tilstås medlemmerne af det italienske parlament, og dette i medfør af artikel 68 i den italienske forfatning, som ikke giver mulighed for hr. Pannella at give afkald på denne immunitet. Dette er et retsligt faktum.
In short, does the Com mission intend to act on the requests relating to education and health problems put forward by Parliament in its resolution?
Vi befinder os i en situation, hvor vi ikke kan stille Kommissionen tillægsspørgsmål.
We are left in a situation where we are unable to ask the Commission supplementary questions.
Jeg mener, det er ganske frustrerende at stille Kommissionen et spørgsmål, høre svaret og dernæst ikke have lejlighed til at vende tilbage med et tillægsspørgsmål.
I think it is quite frustrating to put a question to the Commission, hear the answer and not have the opportunity to come back with a supplementary.
Jeg håber, at udvalget for forret ningsordenen og for andragender vil se på denne situation, for det er utilfredsstillende for de af os, der virkelig ønsker at komme til bunds i Kommissionens reaktion eller mangel på samme.
Now I would hope that the Committee on the Rules of Procedure and Petitions would look at this situation because it is unsatisfactory for those of us who really want to get to the bottom of the action or non-action taken by the Com mission.
Formanden. — Fru Clwyd, jeg tror, De tager fejl.
President. — Mrs Clwyd, I think you are wrong.
Systemet har kun fungeret på forsøgsbasis i en måned.
The system has only been in operation on a trial basis for one month.
Men der er stadig væk spørgetiden, hvor De har enhver mulighed for at stille tillægsspørgsmål for at få flest mulige oplysninger ud af Kommissionen.
But there is still Question Time where you have every opportunity of putting supplementary questions to get the maximum information out of the Commission.
Hvis De ikke er tilfreds med svarene, kan De insistere på en uddybning i spørgetiden.
President. — The first part of Question Time, questions to the Commission, is now closed.
Anmodning om ophævelse af et medlems immunitet
Request for a Member's immunity to be waived
1-298/82) af Donnez for retsudvalget om en anmodning om ophævelse af et medlems immunitet.
1-298/ 82) by Mr Donnez, on behalf of the Legal Affairs Committee, on the request for a Member's immunity to be waived.
Når retsudvalget tro mod sin retspraksis rejser denne debat, er det fordi det er af den opfattelse, at det var i Parlamentets interesse, at hr. Pannellas immunitet ikke blev ophævet. Personligt beklager jeg retsudvalgets afgørelse, eftersom det var ham magtpåliggende, at hans immunitet blev ophævet.
his arguments but they were not accepted by the Legal Affairs Committee which is of the opinion — follow ing the decision taken by you on 9 March 1982 in con nection with a report by our colleague Karel de Gucht on a similar case — that the primary purpose of parliamentary immunity is to guarantee the integrity of our parliamentary institution and the independence of its members.
Men jeg tror jeg kan sige, at afgørelsen er fuldt og helt i overensstemmelse med principperne for vor retspraksis, og at den i sidste instans er i overensstemmelse med vor institutions interesser. Jeg vil derfor bede Dem, hr. formand
It follows that immunity cannot be waived for reasons relating solely to the political activities of an individual member.
Donnez, ordfører. — (FR) Hr. formand, kære kolleger, jeg tror ikke det er nødvendigt med lange forklaringer om denne anmodning om ophævelse af vor kollega, hr. Pannellas immunitet, da det dels fore kommer mig, at den af mig forelagte betænkning for retsudvalget og ¡sær den afgørelse, som Parlamentet traf den 9. marts i en lignende sag, er tilstrækkeligt i sig selv.
Mr Donnez, rapporteur. — (FR) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I do not think that there is any need for a long debate on this request for the parliamentary immunity of our colleague, Mr Pannella, to be waived. It seems to me that the report which I am presenting to you on behalf of the Legal Affairs Committee and above all the decision already taken by our Parliament on 9 March last in connection with a similar case are sufficient in themselves.
Donnez og kære kolleger, om at bekræfte den afgørelse, som retsudvalget har truffet om ikke at ophæve hr. Pannellas immunitet.
In my report, the Legal Affairs Committee is in effect asking you to maintain the precedent established by Parliament on 9 March 1982.
havde fået sin immunitet ophævet for et år siden, ikke havde besvaret initiativerne fra de italienske domsmyndigheder!
I personally regret the decision of the Legal Affairs Committee as far as he is concerned because he wanted his parliamentary immunity to be lifted.
Jeg fremsætter derfor dels ønske om, at man træffer en anden afgørelse for mit vedkommende, dels at man fremover er mere opmærksom på den enkeltes rettigheder og pligter.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I therefore call upon you to confirm the decision taken by the Legal Affairs Committee and to refrain from waiving Mr Pannella's parliamentary immunity.
Hr. formand, jeg takker Dem for, at De lod mig give så nøje udtryk for mine synspunkter.
Mr Pannella appealed against this verdict and the case is now pending before the Appeal Court in Rome.
Det var virkelig meget venligt af Dem.
Such are the facts.
Pannella.:— (FR) Hr. formand, hvis De tillader det, vil jeg gerne sige et par ord om vor udmærkede kollega, hr. Donnez' udtalelser.
Mr Pannella. — (FR) Mr President, with your per mission, I should like to comment briefly on the state ment by our esteemed colleague, Mr Donnez.
Donnez, ordfører. — (FR) Hr. formand, jeg formoder, at Parlamentet ønsker, at ordføreren for retsudvalget kommer med visse præciseringer efter de erklæringer, hr. Pannella netop har fremsat.
Pursuant to the jurisprudence of the European Parliament, Mr Pannella benefits from the immunity recognized to members of the Italian Parliament by virtue of Article 68 of the Italian Constitution which — and I am merely noting the legal facts — does not allow Mr Pannella the right to waive his immunity.
Det hele startede ved nævningedomstolen.
First of all, this whole matter comes under the appeal jurisdiction of the Assize Court.
I princippet kunne advokaten kræve, at jeg blev idømt femten års fængsel.
In principle, the public prosecutor could have asked for me to be sent enced to well over 15 years in prison.
Jeg blev ved nævningedomstolen frikendt for det væsentlige og idømt fire måneder for nogle mindre forseelser.
I was acquitted by the Assize Court on the accusation of substance and sentenced to four months for a minor offence.
Men statsadvokaten — den samme som havde nedlagt påstand på straf mod mig — appellerede.
But the prosecutor — who had already pleaded against me — lodged an appeal.
Man ønsker at dømme mig ved nævningedomstolen for alle mine forseelser.
As a result, Mr President, they wish to judge all my offences in the Assize Court.
Ja, jeg burde endog sige mine forbrydelser, for det drejer sig om nævningedomstolen . . .
I might even say my crimes since after all it is an Assize Court.
Dette noterer jeg mig gerne.
He put forward
Jeg ønskede ikke selv at sige det, men det er rigtigt, at Den italienske Republiks statsadvokat har appel leret tre anklagepunkter, som hr. Pannella var blevet frifundet for af den første dømmer.
Now, Mr President, in the name of the rights of each individual, I must call upon all our colleagues to show a measure of prudence.
For vi har alle en uafhændelig ret, som udgør en del af os selv, vor historie og vor sandhed, nemlig den personlige frihed.
Pannella ourselves, of our history and of our truth: an individual right.
Det er faktisk indlysende, at medlemmet som individ har ret til at blive dømt.
which Mr Pannella had been found not guilty by the first judge.
Og jeg har ikke undladt over for retsudvalget at gøre gældende, at der kan være en sådan modstrid mellem et medlems ret til at hævde sin uskyld ved institution.
Mr Pannella was acquitted on the fundamental charges but sentenced to four months' imprisonment for offences which he qualifies as minor or, more specifically, crimes which he qualifies as minor.
Der kan rent faktisk være en sådan modstrid, og det er denne modstrid, hr. Pannella hentydede til for lidt siden.
I am using Mr Pannella's own terminology here.
Hvis der en dag opstår modstrid mellem en institutions korporative interesser og de grundlæggende rettigheder — dvs. den personlige frihed — skal vi så altid træffe afgørelse i den retning, som De hidtil er gået ind for?
When an occasion arises on which there is a contradiction between the corporative interests of an institution and the fundamental rights of an individual, are we always to rule in the same way as we have done up to now?
Det tror jeg ikke, hr. formand.
I do not think so, Mr President.
Jeg anmoder Dem — både for mig selv men også for alle andre i fremtiden — om at tilstå mig retten til at blive offentligt frikendt, retten til at afsløre en procedure bestående af politiske intriger og forfølgelse, retten til at blive dømt i mit folks, det italienske folks navn.
I am asking you — on my own behalf and also for the benefit of others in future — to recognize that I have the right to a public acquittal: the right to see unmasked a procedure which was politically based and tantamount to persecution, the right to be judged in the name of my own people, the people of Italy.
Denne ret kan ikke tages fra mig under henvisning til vore kollegers prærogativer.
That right cannot be taken from me in the name of the prerogatives of our colleagues.
Man bør ikke lade en institutions korporative prærogativer gå forud for den enkeltes grundlæggende personlige rettigheder.
The corporative prerogatives of an institu tion cannot be allowed to prevail over the fundamental right of an individual.
Hr. formand, det er af disse årsager, at jeg anmoder Dem om et give mig mulighed for at blive dømt i mit land, således at jeg kan afsløre visse advokaters udlægning af retten, som ikke tjener retstilstanden til ære.
That is why I am asking you, Mr President, to allow me to be judged in my own country in order to de nounce the use of the law by public prosecutors who do no honour to a constitutional State.
Da han var italiensk parlamentsmedlem, blev det italienske parlament nødt til at beskæftige sig med en anmodning om ophævelse af den parlamentariske immunitet, som de pågældende myndigheder havde indgivet.
The only question which arises in this instance is to ascertain whether there is not sometimes a conflict of interests between the rights of a Parliamentarian and the rights of Parliament.
I fire ud af fem tilfælde blev denne ophævelse nægtet.
Of course a Member of Par liament as an individual citizen has the right to stand trial.
Dette betyder, at selv det italienske parlament i medfør af den italienske forfatning i fire ud af fem tilfælde — således af forstå, at det femte tilfælde var et særligt tilfælde — har truffet en afgørelse, som den retsudvalget i dag anmoder Europa-Parlamentet om at træffe.
I did not fail to draw the attention of the Legal Affairs Committee to this major disparity which may exist between the right of a Parliamentarian to have his own innocence recognized by the competent courts of his country and the right of Parliament to protect our own institution.
Jeg beklager til en vis grad, at hr. Pannella ikke selv kan forklare sig for domsmyndighederne, men det forhold at vi har truffet afgørelse om, at der ikke var grund til at ophæve hr. Pannellas immunitet lader formode, at vi mente han var helt uskyldig. Under alle omstændigheder ønsker jeg ham frikendt.
There may be a contradiction here and Mr Pannella alluded to this contradiction a moment ago. But, in the light of the decision taken by the Legal Affairs Committee, I do not believe that the contradiction exists in this particular case and I wish now to give you an example which Mr Pannella can verify for himself.
Kære kolleger, giv mig mulighed for at blive dømt.
I ask you, ladies and gentlemen, to allow me to stand judgment.
Jeg tror vi har fælles retsprincipper.
I think we all subscribe to the same principles of law.
De vil give mig mulighed for at fremføre, at jeg på samme tid har forsvaret vort Parlaments anseelse og mine egne grundlæggende rettigheder.
They will allow me to say that I have defended at one and the same time the prestige of our Assembly and my own fundamental rights.
Jeg ønsker af få lov hertil, hr. formand, for der er ved at ske noget meget alvorligt i Italien: for nogle dage siden — dette frem fører jeg hermed offentligt for retsudvalget — indbragte en italiensk dommer sag for forfatningsdomstolen mod vort Parlaments prærogativer, fordi vor forsamling, efter at et italiensk parlamentsmedlem
I hope that I shall be authorized to do so, Mr President, because a very serious process is under way in Italy: only a few days ago — and I say this publicly to the Legal Affairs Committee — an Italian magistrate appealed to the constitutional courts against the prerogatives of our Assembly since our Assembly had not responded to the initiatives of the Italian magistrature after the immunity of an Italian Member of Parliament had been lifted for one year.
Afstemningen finder sted i næste afstemningstid.
President. — I call the rapporteur.
Forbindelserne EØF-De forenede Stater
Relations between the EEC and the United States of America
Formanden. — Næste punkt på dagsordenen er interimsbetænkning (dok.
President. — The next item is the interim report (Doc.
1-300/82) af Gredal for det politiske udvalg om de politiske aspekter af forbindelserne mellem Fællesskabet og Amerikas Forenede Stater.
1-300/82) by Mrs Gredal, on behalf of the Legal Affairs Committee, on the political aspects of relations between the Community and the United States of America.
Parlamentet er af den opfattelse, at parterne i spørgsmål vedrørende verdensfreden og sikker heden må respektere, at de er jævnbyrdige, også i situationer hvor de har modstridende interesser; derfor bør parterne ikke træffe ensidige beslutninger i spørgsmål vedrørende verdensfreden og sikkerheden; princippet om jævnbyrdighed forud sætter i forbindelse med alle afgørelser en omfattende udveksling af oplysninger og rettidig konsultation. tation.
14.6.82 in situations in which their interests conflict; the partners must not therefore take unilateral decisions on questions affecting world peace and security: the principle of equality requires a com prehensive exchange of views and early consultation in connection with all decisions.
Der har gennem årene været et snævert samarbejde mellem USA og Fællesskabet på forskellige niveauer.
Through the years there has been close cooperation between the USA and the Community at different levels.
Jeg vil gerne understrege det særdeles nødvendige i et snævrere samarbejde mellem de folkevalgte repræsentanter.
I would emphasize what is particularly necessary in closer cooperation between the democratically elected representatives.
Det er ikke et spørgsmål om forhandlingskompetence til Europa-Parlamentets delegation over for USAs kongres. Det er unødvendigt.
It is not a question of the European Parliament having powers to negotiate with the US Congress.
Vores vigtigste opgave er at påvirke hinanden, gøre vore handle måder forståelige for hinanden og måske derved ændre dem.
Our main task is to influence one another, have our lines of action mutually understood and perhaps change them in the process.
Gredal, ordfører. — Hr. formand, siden 1972 har der været konstante møder mellem USAs kongres og Europa-Parlamentet.
Mrs Gredal, rapporteur. — (DA) Mr President, since 1972 there has been a constant succession of meetings between the US Congress and the European Parliament.
Efter det sidste møde i Haag i januar i år og efter en diskussion i det politiske udvalg blev der fremsat ønske om, at der blev lavet en betænkning om forholdet mellem USA og Europa. Jeg vil godt understrege, at dette er en interimsbetænkning.
After the last meeting in The Hague last January and following a discussion in the Political Affairs Committee, it was decided that a report should be prepared on relations between the USA and Europe.
Den skal betragtes som det politiske signal, vi ønsker at give til USAs kongres ved det møde, som vi skal have med kongressen, og som starter i næste uge. Et politisk signal, der viser en smule om, hvor vi står.
It should be regarded as the political signal we wish to give to the US Congress at the meet ing which is to be held with the Congress and is due to begin next week.
Der vil senere fremkomme en større betænkning, som udover de politiske aspekter også vil medtage økonomiske, valutariske, landbrugsmæssige og andre ting, således at vi kan få en sammenhængende betænkning om alle vore problemer i forbindelse med USA.
A more extensive report will be prepared at a later date which will also cover economic, currency, agricultural and other matters, in addition to the political aspects, thus providing a systematic review of all the problems in our relations with the USA.
Præsident Reagan har lige aflagt besøg i Europa, Resultaterne af dette besøg vil vi diskutere med vore amerikanske kolleger i næste uge i Washington, og vort spørgsmål til dem vil helt sikkert blive: Er der nu større forståelse for den begyndende europæiske selv stændige holdning, som i mange tilfælde er betinget af en politisk, geografisk og økonomisk situation i Europa, der er forskellig fra USA?
President Reagan has just visited Europe. We shall discuss the results of this visit with our American col leagues next week in Washington, and our question to them will most certainly be: do you now have a more understanding attitude towards the independent stance which is developing in Europe and which is deter mined in many cases by a political, geographic and economic situation which is different to that of the USA?
Jeg er gammel nok til at huske De forenede Staters og det amerikanske folks indsats under anden verdenskrig.
I am old enough to remember the part played by the United States and the American people in the Second World War.
Men mange unge i dag både i USA og i Europa har ikke haft disse oplevelser — heldigvis kan vi sige.
But many young people today, both in the USA and in Europe, have not had this experience — fortunately, it might be added.
Vi har derfor efter min mening på begge sider af Atlanten pligt til også at lade disse historiske kendsgerninger om gensidighed gå videre til de nye generationer.
It is our duty, there fore, in my opinion, on both sides of the Atlantic to ensure that the historical facts of this interaction be passed on to the new generations.
Men det betyder ikke, at vi ikke kan udtrykke bekymring.
But that does not mean that we cannot express concern.
Det betyder ikke, at vi skal ignorere og overse en række spørgsmål og problemer af såvel økonomisk som politisk art. Tværtimod skal vi gøre opmærksom på dem.
I shall not concern myself with details in my introduction, Mr President, but I must say that the failure to reach a mutually satisfactory settlement of a question as important as that of trade in steel is bound to be cause for concern in Europe.