Yesterday, the European Parliament’s Legal Committee decided to lift the immunity of PiS MEP Beata Kemp, among others. This happened at the request of the Polish court. The wPolityce.pl portal has accessed the commission’s draft decision of October 6 this year. A month before the immunity of the parliamentarian of Sovereign Poland was lifted, the committee’s rapporteur reported to its members that Beata Kempa should not lose her immunity. It’s not the end. Gilles Lebreton, the author of the project, clearly states in his view that submitting the application to the European Parliament is a political action and is intended to attack MP Kempa.
READ ALSO: Will the immunities of four United Right members of the European Parliament be taken away? Jaki: Their mouths are filled with “freedom”, and they want censorship so badly
The issue of Beata Kempa’s immunity is the result of a shocking request from the Polish court, which was hearing a subsidiary complaint filed by Rafał Gawł, the founder of the controversial Center for Monitoring Racist and Xenophobic Behavior. Gaweł is an activist who has been convicted by final judgment and whose fraud has been proven. His cassation appeal was declared “unfounded” by the Supreme Court. The criminal decided that the Law and Justice election spot (from autumn 2018), which addressed the issue of illegal immigration and which was distributed by Polish MEPs, PiS, including Beata Kempa, Beata Mazurek, Patryk Jaki and Tomasz Poręba, was a incitement to hatred. Thanks to a court in Warsaw, a request for the waiver of the immunities of Polish Members of the European Parliament was submitted to the European Parliament. The EP Legal Affairs Committee has started its work.
Gilles Lebreton was elected rapporteur on the issue of Beata Kempa’s immunity. This is a position that partly combines the characteristics of a judge and a public prosecutor. Lebreton is an academic lecturer and lawyer known throughout France. He is also an expert and teacher in the field of international law. The French parliamentarian carefully checked all the documentation of the case, analyzed the evidence and prepared his draft version of the commission. Lebreton knew the case best of all the committees. He also took part in Beata Kempa’s hearing before the Legal Committee. It turns out that not all its members participated in this event, which plays a key role here from a legal point of view.
Gilles Lebreton’s draft report leaves no stone unturned on the Polish court’s bizarre request to revoke Beata Kemp’s immunity. He points out that the European Parliament cannot be considered a court and that an MEP cannot be considered a “defendant” in the context of the waiver of immunity procedure.
Absurdities and political attacks
Lebreton also points out the obvious absurdity arising from the request to waive his immunity. The problem of illegal immigration concerns the work of the European Parliament and it is clear that Members of the European Parliament (including Beata Kempa) are raising this issue.
(…) the fact that an MP shares or republishes an election advertisement for her political party on social media is an activity inextricably linked to her parliamentary duties, especially if the content of the advertisement is related – as in the present case – with immigration, a frequent topic of debate in the European Parliament
– we read in Lebreton’s draft report.
(…) the content of this election commercial does not exceed the limits of controversy generally accepted in the political life of the Member States of the European Union, and furthermore, it has not been the subject of any condemnations under Polish national law (…)
– emphasizes the rapporteur of the Committee on Legal Affairs.
The main conclusion of the French lawyers’ report focuses on the essence of the case, which would not have been heard in the European Parliament without an overzealous judge who sent a request to parliament to waive Beata Kemp’s immunity. Lebreton states that the legal procedure was started with political intentions.
whereas this case seems to demonstrate the existence of fumus persecutionis,i.e. “specific evidence” showing that the above-mentioned initiated the legal proceedings with the intention of damaging the political activities of the MP, and in particular her activities as a Member of the European Parliament, refuses to waive Beata’s immunity Kempa
– the French lawyer and MEP concludes his advice.
Why was the Frenchman’s project not accepted by the legal committee? This is a clear political stunt and a blow against Beata Kempa. Lebreton was outvoted and his report did not go from committee to the European Parliament. That is why the political party voted in favor of the decision to strip Kemp of his immunity. A stark curiosity about this scandal is the fact that Andrzej Halicki of PO did not vote on the immunity of his Polish colleague. He sent his German colleague to the committee’s deliberations. It is clear that the decisions of the judicial ‘caste’ appeal to Tusk’s German-Polish ‘coalition’ in the European Parliament. But where is the rule of law?
WB
Source: wPolityce
Emma Matthew is a political analyst for “Social Bites”. With a keen understanding of the inner workings of government and a passion for politics, she provides insightful and informative coverage of the latest political developments.