Published: 29.10.2019
The District Court for Warsaw – Śródmieście decided to apply for the European Parliament for the waiver of the immunity for Guy Verhofstadt. The Belgian politician in 2017 called the participants of the Independence March “fascists, Neo-Nazis and white supremacists”. The private indictment, on behalf of dr Bawera Aondo-Akaa, was filed by layers from the Ordo Iuris Institute.
In May 2019, the District Court for Warsaw – Śródmieście issued a decision on the discontinuation of the proceedings, indicating that allegedly there were no legal bases to submit the request of the victim for the waiver of the immunity for Guy Verhofstadt, the Member of the European Parliament. Therefore, the court did not allow the prosecution of the entity.
The complaint against this decision was filed by Ordo Iuris employees, accusing of the infringement of a number of provisions of the European Parliament's Rules of Procedure by Verhofstadt and indicating the cutting the prosecutor off the right to court. The District Court in Warsaw fully concurred with the complaint and waived the decision of the District Court, indicating that it has the obligation to request the President of the European Parliament for initiating the procedure of the waiver of the immunity protecting Guy Verhofstadt. Therefore, the court of thirst instance issued a final decision on filing the request to the European Parliament for the waiver of the immunity for Guy Verhofstadt, the Member of the European Parliament.
“The entitlement of the common court to file the request for waiver of the immunity for the Member of the European Parliament constitutes the implementation of the citizen's right to be heard by the court. Adopting the opposite interpretation, asserting one’s own rights the Member of the European Parliament would appear as a right of only formal nature which may never be effective. We are expecting the position of the President of the European Parliament” – said Filip Wołoszczak, a lawyer from the Ordo Iuris Litigation Center.
“Unfortunately, due to procedural independence and inaction of the Polish court, bringing to justice Guy Verhofstadt for defamatory statements addressed to dr Bawera Aondo-Akaa lasted almost two years. We hope that the Member of the European Parliament during the meeting of the European Parliament will explain to the victim why he used towards her such kind of offensive statements. Maybe the debate in the European Parliament will lead him to reflection and even apologising to the victim for using harmful and unjustified words going far beyond the freedom of expression” – add dr Bartosz Lewandowski, a lawyer from the Ordo Iuris Litigation Center.
- According to polls, a majority of Poles support an increased legal availability of prenatal killing than the public has access to at present. This support fluctuates, however, depending on how a poll’s questions are formulated.
11.01.2024
- The Court of Justice of the European Union has declared inadmissible preliminary questions from the District Court in Katowice and the District Court in Krakow in connection with an ongoing dispute over how judges are appointed in Poland.
- The courts asked the CJEU whether judges appointed at the request of the National Council of the Judiciary, which since 2018 has consisted mostly of parliamentary representatives, can be considered independent.
- Spanish authorities have banned public prayer, including the recitation of the rosary for the homeland. The decision is in response to mass protests by the population expressing opposition to the amnesty of Catalan separatists.
- States, by introducing legislation criminalising silent prayer, are violating the right to freedom of thought and conscience, which is a fundamental human right.
The Finnish Court of Appeal acquitted former Interior Minister Päivi Räsänen, who was accused of hate speech. The charge concerned a post on the 'X' platform (formerly Twitter) containing a passage from Scripture criticising homosexual practices and quotes from a publication issued in 2004 on marriage and sexuality. The criminalisation of speech through legislation on an undefined concept such as 'hate speech' has the potential to restrict the right to freedom of expression and thus poses a serious threat to democracy.
© 2016 ORDO IURIS - Instytut Na Rzecz Kultury Prawnej
