Qatargate In Brussels: Will Members Of Parliament Face Prosecution Like Ordinary Citizens?

The only case that the immunity is not required to remove the immunity and the police may be arrested is to be arrested in self -sufficiency to commit a crime that has been sentenced to five years in prison, such as the offense of corruption.

If the former vice -president of the European Parliament and Eurovision Eva Kaili was not arrested for acts of corruption, we might not have been talking about the Qatargate scandal today. Her arrest by the Belgian police authorities, after months of surveillance, eliminated the immunity she enjoys. Immigration, which the Greek law enforcement allegedly used abusively to cover the illegal actions of his wife and co -defendants in the Qatargate scandal, which is the largest corruption scandal that has been revealed to date in the European Parliament.

Behind the revelation of the bribery and corruption case of MEPs and agents of the European Parliament, there is 66 -year -old Belgian financial prosecutor Michel Claz and a small group of indifferent police officers. According to the Belgian newspaper Le Soir, they “cried out of joy” when they managed to capture her father Kaili with a bag containing 600,000 euros, as the development rejected any arguments about Kaili’s immunity, which was found in the house another 600,000 euros. Mr Claz and his team knew very well that, if they did not arrest them in self, the case may have ended up in the Greek calendars because of the immunity enjoyed by Eva Kaili.

The same is true today with our Members. They can be hidden behind their immunity even if they are considered suspected of committing criminal offenses. In such a case, the Attorney General will have to turn to the Supreme Court, which should be convinced of the need to remove the immunity of a Member. The only case that the immunity is not required to remove the immunity and the police may be arrested is to be arrested in self -sufficiency to commit a crime that has been sentenced to five years in prison, such as the offense of corruption.

The positives of the outgoing government include the bill tabled by the Ministry of Justice to limit the range of parliamentary immunity enjoyed by our Members today, precisely so that the police authorities of a Member of Parliament will not be an obstacle to the police authorities in the case of criminal offenses.

The bill:

The bill is titled as “the thirty -second amendment of the Constitution Law of 2021” and was submitted to Parliament for a vote on 14/1/2021, where it is pending. The bill proposes to amend Article 83 of the Constitution to limit the general immunity that today enjoy the members of the House only in the exercise of their duties. In particular, it is proposed as the relevant article of the Constitution is replaced by the following new article: “Members are not subject to criminal prosecution and are not liable for any express or voting of them or by any declaration or act of any statement or acting by them. parliamentary duties. ”

Today, General Immunity

Article 83 of the Constitution, as it is today, provides for the following in relation to parliamentary immunity: “The MPs are not subject to criminal prosecution and are not responsible for any obstructive opinion or voting in the House of Representatives. The Member may not be permitted by the Supreme Court to be prosecuted, arrested or imprisoned if he is still a Member of Parliament. Such a license is not required on an offense of imprisonment of five years or more if the wrongdoer was occupied by self. In this case, the Supreme Court of Affairs, by notifying the competent authority by the competent authority, shall decide on whether or not to continue the persecution of the prosecution or detention as long as the delinquency is still a Member of Parliament. If the Supreme Court refuses to grant the license for the prosecution of the MP, the time as the Member may not be prosecuted shall not be taken into account at the time of limitation on the criminal. If the Supreme Court refuses to grant the authorization to impose a jail imposed by a Member of Parliament by a competent court, the execution of this decision shall be postponed until the convict ceases to be a Member of Parliament. ”

Will They Vote?

The controversial bill that restricts the range of parliamentary immunity was first submitted to Parliament on 2/3/2016, that is, the eve of parliamentary elections. It was first discussed at a meeting of the Parliamentary Committee on October 2019 where there was mainly concern about whether immunity is right to limit it only to the freedom of voting or expression of opinion, or should also cover Members’ statements when for Members of Parliament. Example of opposition criticism. The bill was finally withdrew by letter by former Minister of Justice Emilis Yolitis on 16/11/2020 with the aim of studying in cooperation with the Attorney General. Upon re -examination of the matter and consultations with the Attorney General, a revised bill was prepared in Parliament on 14/1/2021 and covers any declaration or act carried out by MPs in the exercise of their parliamentary duties.

Lifting of The Immunity of Four Members

To date, the Supreme Court, at the request of the Attorney General, has ruled the immunity of four MPs in order to be investigated and thus to be tried for committing criminal offenses. Particularly:

*The most recent case was the then DISY MP and today independent MP Andreas Themistocleous. The Supreme Court of Appeal, the immunity of Mr. Themistokleous on February 10, 2016 for violating the Road Traffic Code as he was repeatedly arrested for exceeding the speed limit, reaching 190 kilometers per hour on a highway. He was sentenced by the Nicosia District Court to a fine and deprivation of his driving license for six months.

*A year before, in February 2015, the Supreme Court ruled the immunity of EDEK MP Fidia Sarika to investigate against him for bribery, corruption and abuse of power. The offenses took place when he was Mayor of Paphos. He was sentenced by the Paphos Criminal Court to four years in prison for starvation received from contracting companies undertaken by the Pafos Sewerage Council projects.

*In 1984, the Supreme Court ruled the immunity of DISY MP and lawyer George Georgiou, who was accused and sentenced to prison for falsification case.

*In 1961, the Supreme Court ruled to remove the immunity of the “Patriotic Front” MP Lefkios Rododenous, who was accused and sentenced to a prison sentence for a citizen’s blackmailing case.

This article is originally published on politis.com.cy