natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Ces écoutes téléphoniques avaient été ordonnées par le juge d'instruction auprès du tribunal de grande instance de Paris dans le cadre d'une procédure pénale pour recel et abus de biens sociaux à charge de M. Jean‑Charles Marchiani et d'autres personnes: supposition était faite, notamment, que, d'août 1991 à janvier 1994, un montant total de 9 703 826 FRF était parvenu sur des comptes bancaires suisses de M. Marchiani.
The interception of telephone calls had been ordered by the investigating judge at the Paris Tribunal de Grande Instance (Court of First Instance) in connection with a criminal investigation into suspected receiving of stolen property and misappropriation of corporate assets by Mr Jean-Charles Marchiani and others, including the supposed payment, between August 1991 and January 1994, of sums amounting to FF 9,703,826 into Mr Marchiani’s Swiss bank accounts.
Ce montant correspondrait à la commission occulte versée par une entreprise dans le but d'obtenir un contrat avec l'Aéroport de Paris‑Charles de Gaulle pour un système de transport, de dépôt et de tri des bagages.
This sum allegedly represented an illegal commission paid by a company to obtain a contract with the Paris - Charles De Gaulle airport for a baggage transport, storage and retrieval system.
Il appert de la documentation figurant dans les actes que les écoutes ont été ordonnées par le juge d'instruction français à compter du 14 juin 2004, lendemain de l'élection du Parlement européen, et qu'elles prirent fin le 9 août 2004.
The relevant documentation clearly shows that the interception of the telephone line was ordered by the French investigating judge from 14 June 2004, the day after the elections to the European Parliament, and ended on 9 August 2004.
Il est patent que le juge a estimé, à tort, que le déroulement de l'élection mettait fin ipso facto au mandat de député européen de M. Marchiani, alors que, en vertu de l'article 5, paragraphes 1 et 3, de l'Acte portant élection des représentants au Parlement européen au suffrage universel direct, du 20 septembre 1976, ce mandat expirait à la veille de l'ouverture de la nouvelle législature, c'est‑à‑dire le 19 juillet 2004 à minuit.
It is obvious that the judge mistakenly believed that, once the elections were in progress, Mr Marchiani’s term of parliamentary office had come to an end, whereas, under Article 5(1) and (3) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage, it did not come to an end until the eve of the new parliamentary term, in other words at midnight on 19 July 2004.
Il convient de rappeler également que le Parlement européen rejeta la demande de levée de l'immunité de M. Marchiani ‑ aux fins de la même procédure pénale à laquelle se rapporte l'affaire à l'examen ‑ que le même juge d'instruction auprès du tribunal de grande instance de Paris (M. Philippe Courroye), qui ordonna les écoutes téléphoniques ci‑dessus visées
It should also be pointed out that the European Parliament had rejected a request for the waiver of Mr Marchiani’s immunity in connection with the same criminal proceedings submitted on 29 April 2003 by the investigating judge at the Paris Court of First Instance (Mr Philippe Courroye) who also ordered the telephone tapping referred to above.
En droit
Legal background
La question qui se pose est de savoir si l'immunité parlementaire dont M. Marchiani jouissait était de nature à interdire aux autorités judiciaires de la République française de mettre sur écoute ses lignes téléphoniques.
The question at issue is whether the parliamentary immunity enjoyed by Mr Marchiani should have prevented the judicial authorities of the French Republic from tapping his telephone line.
Est d'application en l'occurrence l'article 10, lettre a), du Protocole sur les privilèges et immunités des Communautés européennes, du 8 avril 1965:
The case is covered by Article 10(a) of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities of 8 April 1965, which reads as follows:
" Pendant la durée des sessions du Parlement européen, les membres de celui ‑ci bénéficient:
‘During the sessions of the European Parliament, its Members shall enjoy:
a) sur leur territoire national, des immunités reconnues aux membres du parlement de leur pays ".
(a) in the territory of their own state, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament; (...)’ .
Cette disposition fait donc référence à la réglementation applicable en France aux députés nationaux, réglementation applicable, en vertu du Protocole, aux membres français du Parlement européen également.
This provision refers back, therefore, to the rules applying in France to members of the national parliament, which also apply, by virtue of the Protocol, to French Members of the European Parliament.
Le cas d'espèce est régi par l'article 100-7 du code de procédure pénale français, lequel énonce ce qui suit:
The case in question is covered by Article 100-7 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, which reads as follows:
Les formalités prévues par le présent article sont prescrites à peine de nullité. "
The formalities set out by the present article are prescribed under penalty of nullity’.
Il en découle que, en vertu de l'article 10, lettre a), du Protocole sur les privilèges et immunités des Communautés européennes en liaison avec l'article 100-7 du code de procédure pénale français, les autorités judiciaires françaises ne pouvaient légitimement mettre sur écoute les lignes téléphoniques de M. Marchiani sans en informer au préalable le Président du Parlement européen.
It follows that, by virtue of the combined provisions of Article 10(1) of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities and Article 100-7 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, the French judicial authority could not lawfully carry out any interception of Mr Marchiani’s telephone line without having previously informed the President of the European Parliament.
Il appert ictu oculi (à vue d'œil) que le juge suprême de légitimité a commis une erreur en méconnaissant, ou en refusant d'appliquer, une règle du droit primaire européen, au respect scrupuleux de laquelle la République française est tenue.
It is immediately apparent that this supreme judicial authority has erred in disregarding, or refusing to apply, a provision of primary European law which the French Republic is obliged to observe scrupulously.
Il appartiendra donc à la République française de remédier aux effets juridiques de l'arrêt de la Cour de cassation rendu en violation de l'article 10, lettre a), du Protocole sur les privilèges et immunités des Communautés européennes, du 8 avril 1965.
It is the responsibility of the French Republic, therefore, to remedy the legal effects of the judgment of the Court of Cassation, which flies in the face of Article 10(a) of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities of 8 April 1965.
Pour ces motifs, la commission des affaires juridiques recommande au Parlement européen de défendre les immunité et privilèges de M. Jean‑Charles Marchiani, ancien député.
In view of the foregoing, the Committee on Legal Affairs recommends that the European Parliament defend the immunity and privileges of Mr Jean-Charles Marchiani, former Member of the European Parliament.
Jean-Charles Marchiani puutumatuse ja privileegide kaitse taotlus
Request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Jean-Charles Marchiani
vastu: 6 erapooletuid: 0
against: 6 abstentions: 0
Umberto Bossi immuniteedi ja privileegide kaitse taotlus
on the request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Umberto Bossi
- võttes arvesse Umberto Bossit esindava vandeadvokaadi 3. augusti 2004. aasta taotlust tema immuniteedi kaitsmiseks seoses tsiviilasjaga Padua ringkonnakohtus, mis tehti teatavaks 13. septembri 2004. aasta täiskogu istungil;
- having regard to the request, by a barrister acting for Mr Umberto Bossi, for defence of his immunity in connection with criminal proceedings pending before the Padua Civil District Court, of 3 August 2004, announced in plenary sitting on 13 September 2004,
- võttes arvesse 8. aprilli 1965. a Euroopa ühenduste privileegide ja immuniteetide protokolli artikleid 9 ja 10 ja liikmete otsest ja üldist Euroopa Parlamenti valimist käsitleva 20. septembri 1976. a akti artikli 6 lõiget 2;
- having regard to Articles 9 and 10 of the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, and to Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,
- võttes arvesse Euroopa Ühenduste Kohtu 12. mai 1964. a ja 10. juuli 1986. a otsuseid
- having regard to the judgments of 12 May 1964 and 10 July 1986
Vt kohtuasja 101/63: Wagner versus Fohrmann ja Krier, EKL 1964, lk 195 ning kohtuasja 149/85: Wybot versus Faure ja teised, EKL 1986, lk 2391. ;
Case 101/63 Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195, and Case 149/85 Wybot v Faure and others [1986] ECR 2391. of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,
- võttes arvesse õiguskomisjoni raportit ( A6-0209/2005 ),
- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6-0209/2005 ),
A. arvestades, et Umberto Bossi oli Euroopa Parlamendi neljanda koosseisu liige (mandaadi algus 19. juuli 1994, mandaat kontrollitud 15. novembril 1994, mandaadi aegumine 19. juulil 1999) ja viienda koosseisu liige (mandaadi algus 20. juulil 1999, mandaat kontrollitud 15. detsembril 1999, mandaadi aegumine 10. juunil 2001 ühitamatuse tõttu);
A. whereas Umberto Bossi was a Member of the European Parliament in the fourth legislative term (start of mandate on 19 July 1994, mandate verified on 15 November 1994, mandate expired on 19 July 1999) and in the fifth legislative term (start of mandate on 20 July 1999, mandate verified on 15 December 1999, mandate expired on 10 June 2001 for incompatibility),
B. arvestades, et Euroopa Parlamendi liikme suhtes ei tohi algatada uurimist, kohtumenetlust või kohaldada vahistamist tulenevalt sellest, milliseid seisukohti ta on ametiülesannete täitmisel väljendanud või kuidas ta on hääletanud
B. whereas Members of the European Parliament may 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
Euroopa ühenduste privileegide ja immuniteetide protokolli artikkel 9. ;
Article 9 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities. ,
C. arvestades, et Euroopa Parlamendi liikmetele omistatav immuniteet hõlmab ka immuniteeti tsiviilasjade menetlemise suhtes,
C. whereas the immunity from legal proceedings enjoyed by Members of the European Parliament also covers immunity from civil proceedings,
3. teeb presidendile ülesandeks edastada käesolev otsus ja vastutava komisjoni raport viivitamatult Padua ringkonnakohtule.
Instructs its President immediately to forward this decision and the report of the committee responsible to the District Court of Padua.
I. Admissibility of request
I. Admissibility of request
OJ L 278, 8.10.1976, pp. 5-11. .
OJ L 278, 8.10.1976, pp. 5-11. .
Umberto Bossi immuniteedi ja privileegide kaitsmise taotlus
Request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Umberto Bossi
EUROOPA PARLAMENDI OTSUSE ETTEPANEK............................................................3
PROPOSAL FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DECISION
EUROOPA PARLAMENDI OTSUSE ETTEPANEK............................................................4
PROPOSAL FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DECISION
EUROOPA PARLAMENDI OTSUSE ETTEPANEK............................................................5
PROPOSAL FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT DECISION
- võttes arvesse Umberto Bossit esindava vandeadvokaadi 7. mail 2004 esitatud taotlust kaitsta Bossi immuniteeti seoses poolelioleva kriminaalmenetlusega Brescia ringkonnakohtus, millest teatati täiskogu istungil 22. juulil 2004;
- having regard to the request by a barrister acting for Mr Umberto Bossi, for defence of his immunity in connection with criminal proceedings pending before the Brescia District Court, of 7 May 2004, announced in plenary sitting on 22 July 2004,
- võttes arvesse 8. aprilli 1965. aasta Euroopa ühenduste privileegide ja immuniteetide protokolli artikleid 9 ja 10 ning 20. septembri 1976. aasta otsestel ja üldistel valimistel Euroopa Parlamendi saadikute valimist käsitleva akti artikli 6 lõiget 2;
- having regard to Articles 9 and 10 of the Protocol of 8 April 1965 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, 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,
- võttes arvesse Euroopa Kohtu 12. mai 1964. aasta ja 10. juuli 1986. aasta otsuseid
- having regard to the judgements of 12 May 1964 and 10 July 1986
Kohtuasi 101/63: Wagner vs Fohrmann ja Krier [1964] EKL 195 ja kohtuasi 149/85: Wybot vs Faure ja teised [1986] EKL 2391. ;
Case 101/63: Wagner v Fohrmann and Krier [1964] ECR 195 and Case 149/85: Wybot v Faure and others [1986] ECR 2391. of the Court of Justice of the European Communities,
- võttes arvesse kodukorra artikli 6 lõiget 3 ja artiklit 7;
- having regard to Rules 6(3) and 7 of its Rules of Procedure,
- võttes arvesse õiguskomisjoni raportit ( A6-0210/2005 ),
- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs ( A6-0210/2005 ),
A. arvestades, et Umberto Bossi oli Euroopa Parlamendi neljanda koosseisu (mandaadi algus 19. juuli 1994, mandaat kinnitatud 15. novembril 1994, mandaadi lõpp 19. juuli 1999) ja viienda koosseisu (mandaadi algus 20. juuli 1999, mandaat kinnitatud 15. detsembril 1999, mandaadi lõpp 10. juuni 2001) liige;
A. whereas Umberto Bossi was a Member of the European Parliament in the fourth legislative term (start of mandate on 19 July 1994, mandate verified on 15 November 1994, mandate expired on 19 July 1999) and in the fifth legislative term (start of mandate on 20 July 1999, mandate verified on 15 December 1999, mandate expired on 10 June 2001 for incompatibility),
B. arvestades, et Euroopa Parlamendi liikmeid ei või üle kuulata, neid kinni pidada ega neid kohtumenetlusele allutada nende poolt oma kohustuste täitmisel avaldatud arvamuste või antud häälte tõttu
B. whereas Members of the European Parliament may 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
Euroopa ühenduste privileegide ja immuniteetide protokolli artikkel 9. ,
Article 9 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities. ,
3. teeb presidendile ülesandeks edastada käesolev otsus ja vastutava komisjoni raport viivitamatult Brescia ringkonnakohtule.
Instructs its President immediately to forward this decision and the report of the committee responsible to the Brescia District Court.
Umberto Bossi immuniteedi ja privileegide kaitse taotluse kohta ( 2004/2101(IMM) )
on the request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Umberto Bossi ( 2004/2101(IMM) )
- võttes arvesse Umberto Bossit esindava vandeadvokaadi 7. mail 2004 esitatud taotlust kaitsta Bossi immuniteeti seoses poolelioleva kriminaalmenetlusega Bergamo ringkonnakohtus, millest teatati täiskogu istungil 22. juulil 2004;
- having regard to the request by a barrister acting for Mr Umberto Bossi, for defence of his immunity in connection with criminal proceedings pending before the Bergamo District Court, of 7 May 2004, announced in plenary sitting on 22 July 2004,
- võttes arvesse õiguskomisjoni raportit (A6-0000/2005),
- having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A6-0000/2005),
3. teeb presidendile ülesandeks edastada käesolev otsus ja vastutava komisjoni raport viivitamatult Bergamo ringkonnakohtule.
Instructs its President immediately to forward this decision and the report of the committee responsible to the Bergamo District Court.
- võttes arvesse Umberto Bossit esindava vandeadvokaadi 7. mail 2004 esitatud taotlust kaitsta Bossi immuniteeti seoses poolelioleva kriminaalmenetlusega Milano linnakohtus, millest teatati täiskogu istungil 22. juulil 2004;
- having regard to the request by a barrister acting for Mr Umberto Bossi, for defence of his immunity in connection with criminal proceedings pending before the Magistrates' Court in Milan, of 7 May 2004, announced in plenary sitting on 22 July 2004,
B. arvestades, et Euroopa Parlamendi liikmetel on oma riigis samasugune immuniteet nagu selle riigi parlamendi liikmetel
B. whereas Members of the European Parliament shall enjoy in their own state immunity from legal proceedings equivalent to that of a Member of the Parliament of that state
Euroopa ühenduste privileegide ja immuniteetide protokolli artikli 10 punkt a. ;
Article 10(a) of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities. ,
C. arvestades, et Milano linnakohtu otsuses käsitletaval juhtumil kasutas Umberto Bossi vägivalda Itaalia politseiametnike vastu ning ähvardas Itaalia politseiametnikke, kes korraldasid Verona prokuröri nõudel Lega Nordi Milano peakorteri tööruumide läbiotsimise;
C. whereas in the case covered by the judgement of the Magistrates' Court in Milan Umberto Bossi used violence against, and threatened, officers of the Italian police, who were conducting a search of the premises of the Milan headquarters of the Lega Nord, ordered by the Verona Public Prosecutor,
D. arvestades, et Umberto Bossi oli Itaalia parlamendi liige ning et Itaalia konstitutsioonikohus otsustas 17. mail 2001, et Bossil ei ole parlamentaarset immuniteeti, sest solvangud, vastupanu ja vägivaldne käitumine ei ole mingil juhul teod, mille suhtes võiks kohaldada parlamentaarseid privileege;
D. whereas at that time Umberto Bossi was a member of the Italian Parliament and the Italian Constitutional Court decided, on 17 May 2001, that he did not enjoy parliamentary immunity finding that insults and acts of resistance and violence are in no way acts in which parliamentary privilege may apply,
E. arvestades, et sellisel puhul võib kohaldada vaid ülalnimetatud protokolli artikli 10 punkti a ning et Itaalia parlamendi liikmetel ei ole parlamentaarset immuniteeti seoses kohtumenetlustega sellistel asjaoludel,
E. whereas in such a case only Article 10(a) of the above Protocol can be applied and it appears that Members of the Italian Parliament do not enjoy Parliamentary immunity in respect of legal proceedings in such circumstances,
I. Admissibility of requests
I. Admissibility of requests
OJ L 278, 8.10.1976, pp. 5-11. ).
OJ L 278, 8.10.1976, pp. 5-11. ).
On the basis of the above considerations and pursuant to Article 7(2) of the Rules of Procedure, after consideration the reasons for and against defending the Member's immunity, the Committee on Legal Affairs recommends that the European Parliament should defend the Parliamentary immunity of Mr Umberto Bossi.
On the basis of the above considerations and pursuant to Article 7(2) of the Rules of Procedure, after consideration the reasons for and against defending the Member's immunity, the Committee on Legal Affairs recommends that the European Parliament should defend the Parliamentary immunity of Mr Umberto Bossi.
See Constitutional Court, 9-17 May 2001, n.
See Constitutional Court, 9-17 May 2001, n.
Umberto Bossi immuniteedi ja privileegide kaitse taotlus
Request for defence of the immunity and privileges of Umberto Bossi
Puutumatuse ja privileegide kaitse taotlus esitaja taotluse esitamise kuupäev istungil teada andmise kuupäev
Request for defence of immunity from Date of request Date announced in plenary
Barrister Umberto Bossi nimel 7.5.2004 22.7.2004
Barrister acting for Mr Umberto Bossi 7.5.2004 22.7.2004
Ettepanek võtta vastu Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu määrus lepinguväliste kohustuste suhtes kohaldatava õiguse kohta ("Rooma II")
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations ("Rome II")
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT..............................................................................................36
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT................................................................................................3
KODANIKUVABADUSTE, JUSTIITS- JA SISEASJADE KOMISJONI ARVAMUS...........39
OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS 3
ettepaneku kohta võtta vastu Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu määrus lepinguväliste kohustuste suhtes kohaldatava õiguse kohta ("Rooma II")
on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations ("Rome II")
– võttes arvesse komisjoni ettepanekut Euroopa Parlamendile ja nõukogule ( KOM(2003)0427 )
– having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council ( COM(2003)0427 )
– võttes arvesse EÜ asutamislepingu artikli 251 lõiget 2 ja artikli 61 punkti c, mille alusel komisjon esitas Euroopa Parlamendile ettepaneku ( C5‑0338/2003 );
– having regard to Articles 251(2) and 61(c) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament ( C5‑0338/2003 ),
– võttes arvesse õiguskomisjoni raportit ning kodanikuvabaduste, justiits- ja siseasjade komisjoni arvamust ( A6‑0211/2005 ),
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs ( A6‑0211/2005 ),
(5) Määruse reguleerimisala tuleb määratleda viisil, mis on kooskõlas määrusega (EÜ) nr 44/2001 ja 1980. aasta Rooma konventsiooniga .
(5) The scope of the Regulation must be determined in such a way as to be consistent with Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 and the Rome Convention of 1980 .
(5) Käesoleva määruse reguleerimisala ja sätted tuleb määratleda viisil, mis on kooskõlas nõukogu 22. detsembri 2000. aasta määrusega (EÜ) nr 44/2001 kohtualluvuse ja kohtuotsuste täitmise kohta tsiviil- ja kaubandusasjades ning määrusega (EÜ) nr .../... lepinguliste kohustuste suhtes kohaldatava õiguse kohta ("Rooma I") .
(5) The scope and provisions of this Regulation must be determined in such a way as to be consistent with Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters and Regulation (EC) No ../... on the law applicable to contractual obligations (" Rome I") .
(5 a) Ühenduse õiguse järjepidevuse taotlemine eeldab, et käesolev määrus ei piira sätteid, mis on seotud kohaldatava õigusega või mõjutavad seda ja mis sisalduvad lisaks käesolevale määrusele teisese õiguse osaks olevates juriidilistes dokumentides, nagu näiteks kollisiooninormid eriküsimustes, ühenduse ülemusliku tähtsusega kohustuslikud sätted ja siseturu peamised õiguspõhimõtted.
(5a) The concern for consistency in Community law requires that this Regulation be without prejudice to provisions relating to or having an effect on the applicable law, contained in instruments of secondary legislation other than this Regulation, such as conflict rules in specific matters, overriding mandatory rules of Community origin, and the basic legal principles of the internal market.
Selle tulemusena peab käesolev määrus aitama kaasa siseturu nõuetekohasele toimimisele, eriti kaupade ja teenuste vabale liikumisele.
As a result, this Regulation should promote the proper functioning of the internal market, in particular the free movement of goods and services.
(7) Lex loci delicti commissi põhimõte on lepinguväliste kohustuste põhilahendus praktiliselt kõikides liikmesriikides, kuid selle põhimõtte praktiline rakendamine, kui asja osad on jaotunud erinevate riikide vahel, toimub erinevalt.
(7) The principle of the lex loci delicti commissi is the basic solution for non-contractual obligations in virtually all the Member States , but the practical application of the principle where the component factors of the case are spread over several countries is handled differently.
Selline olukord tekitab õiguskindlusetust.
This situation engenders uncertainty in the law.