Click below 
to read the whole post, if need be
Written observations by Ms Ponsatí MEP cinmplaining about the irregular appointment of the rappoorteur for Spain's request for a waiver of her immunity.
Click below to read the whole post, if need be
Transcribed from https://www.elnacional.cat/es/politica/aviso-comin-ponsati-comision-suplicatorio-derechos-fundamentales-adrian-vazquez_557400_102.html
Written observations made by Ms Clara Ponsatí i Obiols concerning the irregularity of the appointment of Mr Angel Dzhambazki as the rapporteur of the file on the request for the waiver of immunity communicated by the President to the Parliament on 13 February 2020.
1. These written remarks refer to the irregularity of the appointment of Mr Angel Dzhambazki as the rapporteur of the file on the request for the waiver of immunity communicated by the President to the Parliament on 13 February 2020, in relation to the Member Clara Ponsatí i Obiols (2020/2031(IMM)).
2. These remarks refer exclusively to this issue. They are therefore made without detriment to any written remarks that, as appropriate, may be made at a later date concerning the other issues arising from the request communicated by the President to the Parliament on 13 February 2020, including, as appropriate, regarding the suitability of Mr Angel Dzhambazki to act as rapporteur.
I. The principles for the application of article 9 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament require the appointment of a different rapporteur for each immunity file, respecting the established turn
3. Article 9.13 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament establishes that “the committee shall lay down principles for the application of this Rule”. The most recent version of these principles was approved by the Committee on its session of 6 November 2019.
4. The principles for the application of article 9 of the Rules of Procedure stipulate in section 6that “the committee shall appoint a rapporteur for each immunity file”. Furthermore, section 8 stipulates that “the responsibility of being rapporteur of the immunity files will rotateamong political groups on an equal basis”.
5. The above-mentioned principles do not set forth the possibility of accumulating different immunity files. Neither do they set forth the possibility of alteringthe established turn on the basis of the connection between different immunity files.
6. Letter c) of article 41.2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, for its part, establishes the obligation of all the institutions of the Union of giving the reasons for their decisions. Naturally, this obligation also applies to the Parliament in a proceeding which affects the fundamental rights of its Members, such as the present one.
II. The decision to appoint Mr Angel Dzhambazki as rapporteur of the file on the request for the waiver of immunity of Ms Clara Ponsatí i Obiols infringes the principles for the application of article 9 of the Rules of Procedure and the Charter of Fundamental Rights
7. In the Committee’s session of 28 January 2020, when Ms Ponsatí Obiols had not yet taken up her seat as a Member of the European Parliament, the Chair communicated to the Committee that, during the coordinators meeting set forth in article 214 of the Rules of Procedure, which took place on 27 January 2020, it had been resolved to appoint the Member Mr Angel Dzhambazki as rapporteur of the files on the request for the waiver of immunity of Mr Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó (2020/2024(IMM)) and Mr Antoni Comín i Oliveres (2020/2025(IMM)).
8. When Ms Ponsatí i Obiols became a Member after the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, the Spanish Supreme Court transmitted to the European Parliament a new request specifically for the waiver of the immunity of Ms Ponsatí i Obiols.
9. In the Committee’s session of 7 May 2020, the Chair communicated to the Committee that the coordinators had resolved to appoint the Member Mr Angel Dzhambazki also as rapporteur ofthe file on the request for the waiver of immunity of Ms Ponsatí i Obiols (2020/2031(IMM)).
10. Despite the provision of letter c) of article 41.2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the reasons for this decision have not been given. Nothing is said to this respect in the minutes of the session of the Committee where this decision was adopted.
11. The decision to appoint Mr Angel Dzhambazki, who had also been appointed as rapporteur of the two immediately preceding immunity files, concerning Mr. Carles Puigdemont i Casamajó and Antoni Comín i Oliveres, as the rapporteur of the file on the request for the waiver of immunity of Ms Ponsatí i Obiols lacks any legal basis. This decision contradicts what is expressly established on sections 6 and 8 of the principles approved by the Committee on Legal Affairs in accordance with article 9.13 of the Rules of Procedure, which, as we have seen, provide that a rapporteur will be appointed for each immunity file, with no exceptions, expressly imposing a rotation on the designation among political groups on an equal basis.
12. In fact, in accordance with the provisions of the abovementioned principles, the Committee of Legal Affairs has, in the past, appointed a rapporteur for each immunity file, regardless of whether the various immunity files originated from the same criminal proceedings or were otherwise connected. Thus, in the session of the Committee of Legal Affairs of 3 May 2017,nin relation to the files on two requests for the waiver nof immunity of two Members issued by the competent French authorities, which originated from the same criminal proceedings, and which had been announced by the president of the Parliament on the Plenary of 26 April 2017, the Chair communicated the appointment of a different rapporteur for each of those files: respectively, the Member Mr Tadeusz Zwiefka and the Member Sra. Heidi Hautala.
13. It is not known, and Ms Ponsatí i Obiols has not been informed, of the reason for appointing as rapporteur of her file the same Member which was appointed previously as rapporteur of the files of Mr Puigdemont i Casamajó and Mr Comín i Oliveres, even though it is clear that it was not his turn to be appointed.
14. The appointment of the same rapporteur for the three immunity files entails a position which is hardly compatible with the obligation of Parliament of treating the immunity file of Ms Ponsatí i Obiols fairly and impartially, as provided by article 41.1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
15. In any case, the charge attributed to Ms Ponsatí i Obiols in the request for the waiver of immunity announced to the Plenary on 13 February 2020 does not even match the charges attributed to Mr Puigdemont i Casamajó and Mr Comín i Oliveres in the requests for the waiver of immunity which affect them, announced to the Plenary on 16 January 2020. These are requests for the waiver of immunity issued on different dates and referring to different charges. Specifically, the request for the waiver of immunity transmitted to the Parliament by the Spanish Supreme Court in relation to the Member Ms Ponsatí i Obiols only makes reference to an alleged crime of sedition.
III. Conclusion
16. Sections 6 and 8 of the principles approved by the Committee on Legal Affairs in accordance with article 9.13 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament are contrary to the appointment of Mr Angel Dzhambazki as rapporteur of the file on the request for the waiver of immunity of Ms Ponsatí i Obiols, which lacks any legal basis.
17. The reasons for the appointment of Mr Angel Dzhambazki have not been given, which contradicts the provision of letter c) of article 41.2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
...ooo000ooo...
See also: Twitter thread (on massive Spanish over-representation in JURI committee): https://twitter.com/CarlosVecino4/status/1329813664313040898?s=20
See also background to immunity waiver requests: https://www.elnacional.cat/es/politica/suplicatorio-puigdemont-parlamento-europeo-vox-dzhambazki-ponente_556230_102.html
Cap comentari:
Publica un comentari a l'entrada