19.6.2018   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/243

—

having regard to two applications for waiver of the immunity of Jean-Marie Le Pen forwarded by the General Public Prosecutor at the Paris Court of Appeal on 14 March 2016 and announced in plenary on 8 June 2016 in connection with two cases pending before the Examining Magistrates at the Paris Regional Court pertaining to incitement to racial hatred (2211/15/21 and 2226/15/9), both of which concern the same facts,

—

having heard Jean-Marie Le Pen in accordance with Rule 9(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union 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, 10 July 1986, 15 and 21 October 2008, 19 March 2010, 6 September 2011 and 17 January 2013 (1),

—

having regard to Article 26 of the Constitution of the French Republic,

—

having regard to Rule 5(2), Rule 6(1) and Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure,

—

having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A8-0301/2016),

A.

whereas two Examining Magistrates at the Paris Regional Court have requested waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Jean-Marie Le Pen in connection with an alleged criminal offence;

B.

whereas, pursuant to Article 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of their own State, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;

C.

whereas, pursuant to Article 26 of the Constitution of the French Republic, ‘no Member of Parliament shall be subject to investigation, arrest, detention or conviction by a court of law for opinions expressed or votes cast by him while carrying out his duties’ and whereas no Member of Parliament may be ‘arrested or otherwise deprived of, or restricted in, his liberty on account of a crime or misdemeanour’ without the consent of Parliament;

D.

whereas Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union stipulates that Members of the European Parliament shall 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;

E.

whereas the purpose of this provision is to ensure that Members of the European Parliament, as a matter of principle, have the right of freedom of expression, but this right does not provide carte blanche for slander, defamation, incitement to hatred or libellous assertions or any other statement which infringes Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

F.

whereas the provisions concerning parliamentary immunity must be interpreted in the light of the values, aims and principles of the EU Treaties;

G.

whereas, for Members of the European Parliament, this absolute immunity implies that opinions cannot be challenged, whether they are expressed during official meetings of Parliament or elsewhere, for example in the media, when there is ‘a link between the opinion expressed and parliamentary duties’;

H.

whereas Jean-Marie Le Pen is accused of having publicly incited racial hatred in a video clip published on the internet on 6 June 2014;

I.

whereas there is no connection between the statement at issue and the parliamentary work of Jean-Marie Le Pen, and whereas Jean-Marie Le Pen therefore was not acting in his capacity as a Member of the European Parliament;

J.

whereas there is no evidence suggesting fumus persecutionis, i.e. an attempt to prevent Jean-Marie Le Pen from performing his parliamentary work;

1.

2.