2016/2028(IMM)

Request for the defence of the immunity of Mario Borghezio

Procedure completed

2016/2028(IMM) Request for the defence of the immunity of Mario Borghezio
RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead JURI DZHAMBAZKI Angel (ECR)
Lead committee dossier: JURI/8/05852
Legal Basis RoP 006
Subjects
Links

Activites

  • 2016/10/25 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
    • T8-0397/2016 summary
  • 2016/10/20 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    • A8-0312/2016 summary
  • 2016/10/12 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading

Documents

  • Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0312/2016
  • Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0397/2016

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

2016-11-22
activities/0 added
date
2016-10-12
body
EP
type
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
committees
  • body
    EP
    responsible
    True
    committee
    JURI
    date
    2016-02-18
    committee_full
    Legal Affairs
    rapporteur
    • group
      ECR
      name
      DZHAMBAZKI Angel
activities/1 added
date
2016-10-20
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0312&language=EN
    text
    • The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted the report by Angel DZHAMBAZKI (ECR, BG), and recommended that the European Parliament not defend the immunity and privileges of Mario BORGHEZIO (ENF, IT).

      Members recalled that the issue concerns criminal proceedings pending before the Court of Milan. According to the notice served by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, Mr Borghezio is alleged to have advocated ideas founded on superiority and racial or ethnic hatred during a radio programme, which behaviour is punishable under Article 1(a) of Italian Law No 205/1993. During the radio programme in question, Mario Borghezio was asked to comment on the appointment and competence of a new member of the Italian Government, namely the new Minister for Integration.

      Members noted that 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. They also noted that the Court of Justice has held, that, in order to enjoy immunity, an opinion must be expressed by a Member of the European Parliament in the performance of his duties, thus entailing the requirement of a link between the opinion expressed and the parliamentary duties. The facts of the case, as manifested in the documents provided to the Committee on Legal Affairs and in the hearing before the latter, indicate that the statements he made during the interview have no direct and obvious connection with his parliamentary activities. Furthermore, the statements are contrary to Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

      Accordingly, the committee called on Parliament not to defend the immunity and privileges of Mario Borghezio.

    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    title
    A8-0312/2016
body
EP
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
activities/2 added
date
2016-10-25
docs
  • url
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0397
    text
    • The European Parliament decided not to defend the privileges and immunities of Mario BORGHEZIO (ENF, IT).

      Parliament recalled that the issue concerns criminal proceedings pending before the Court of Milan, for statements made during a radio programme, when he commented on the appointment and competence of a new member of the Italian Government, namely the new Minister for Integration (Cécile Kyenge), and advocated ideas founded on superiority and racial or ethnic hatred.

      The resolution noted that 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. It also noted that the Court of Justice has held, that, in order to enjoy immunity, an opinion must be expressed by a Member of the European Parliament in the performance of his duties, thus entailing the requirement of a link between the opinion expressed and the parliamentary duties. Since the facts of the case indicate that the statements made during the interview have no direct and obvious connection with Mario Borghezio’s parliamentary activities, and since the statements are contrary to Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the European Parliament decided not to defend the immunity and privileges of Mario Borghezio.

    type
    Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
    title
    T8-0397/2016
body
EP
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
procedure/stage_reached changed
Old
Awaiting committee decision
New
Procedure completed
2016-09-10
2016-02-26

code AGPLv3.0+, data ODBLv1.0, site-content CC-By-Sa-3.0
© European Union, 2011 – Source: European Parliament