Changes from plenary report to adopted text

Change 1

ChangedA. whereas on 29 August 2024, the Budapest II and III District Court submitted a request for waiver of the parliamentary immunity of Klára Dobrev, Member of the European Parliament elected in Hungary, in the context of criminal proceedings for defamation brought against her by a private complainant;prosecuting party;

Change 2

ChangedB. whereas, according to the private motion, on 22 February 2024, Klára Dobrev posted a photo on social media which showed the Prime Minister of Hungary and the private prosecuting party, with an inscription asserting that the complainantprivate prosecuting party was ‘also guilty in a paedophile scandal’ that was ongoing in Hungary at that time;

Change 3

RemovedD. whereas the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

AddedD. whereas Klára Dobrev was elected in the 2019 European elections and was a Member of the European Parliament at the time of the alleged offence;

AddedE. whereas the purpose of immunity provided for in Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

Change 4

RemovedF. whereas Klára Dobrev was elected to Parliament in the 2019 European elections and was a Member of the European Parliament at the time of the alleged offence;

Change 5

ChangedJ. whereas Article 4(2) of the Fundamental Law of Hungary provides that members of the Hungarian National AssemblyParliament enjoy parliamentary immunity; whereas, pursuant to Section 74(1) of Act No XXXVI of 2012 on the National Assembly, criminal proceedings or, in the event of immunity not being waived voluntarily in respect of the matter in question, misdemeanourinfraction proceedings may be initiated or pursued and coercive measures under criminal procedure applied against a Member only with the prior consent of the National Assembly;

Change 6

ChangedL. whereas Klára Dobrev is regarded as a vocal opponent and critic of the Hungarian Government; whereas the private prosecuting party is also the sister of the former President of Hungary, who has beenis a member of the ruling political party; whereas it can thus be inferred that the private prosecuting party is linked to the closest circles of Hungary’s governing political authorities;

Change 7

ChangedM. whereas it appears that under Hungarian law defamation claims can be pursued both on the basis of criminal orlaw and on the basis of civil law, with significant differences in the corresponding possible legal consequences, including the imprisonment; whereas, in the present case, the choice of bringing a criminal action raises doubts as to the objective of redressing actual reputational harm and therefore raises a possibility that the aim of the action exceeds that legitimate objective and aimsis to damage the Klára Dobrev’s reputation as a Member of the European Parliament;

Change 8

ChangedO. whereas it would therefore appear that, in this instance, fumus persecutionis can be assumed, i.e. there is ‘concrete evidence’ that the intention underlying the legal proceedings in question is to undermine the political activity of the MemberKlára concernedDobrev by the request for waiver of immunity;