Case T-353/00 R, Jean-Marie Le Pen v. European Parliament, Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 26 January 2001, not yet reported

Common Market Law Review

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2001, Pages 1297-1308

[No Author Info available]

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85103114113     PISSN: 01650750     EISSN: 18758320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1012992914609     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. 1. Conseil d'Etat, 6 Oct. 2000, M. Jean-Marie Le Pen: (2001/Feb.) Europe, note by Cassia, No. 51.
2. 2. O.J. 1976, L 278.
3. 3. I.e. 9 June 2000; Mr Le Pen lodged his appeal at the Conseil d'Etat on 5 June 2000.
4. 4. See para 65 of the Order.
5. 5. In Les Verts v. European Parliament, the Court decided that “an action for annulment may lie against measures adopted by the Parliament intended to have legal effects vis-a-vis third parties”, Case 249/83, [1986] ECR 1339. Art. 230(1) EC in its present version results from an amendment included in the Maastricht Treaty codifying the Court's ruling in Les Verts.
6. 6. Para 66. Our translation. At the time this note was written, the English version of the Order was not available.
7. 7. See the information given by Lhomme and Rivais on this affair: Le Monde, 25 April 2001, p. 10.
8. 8. See e.g. Case 149/85, R. Wybot v. E. Faure et al., [1986] ECR 2391, at para 23: “In accordance with the balance of powers between the institutions provided for by the treaties, the practice of the European Parliament cannot deprive the other institutions of a prerogative granted to them by the treaties themselves”; Case C-327/91, France v. Commission, [1994] ECR I-3641, at para 36.
9. 9. See e.g. Joined Cases 42 & 49/59, SNUPAT, [1961] ECR 53, at 75.
10. 10. See on this point infra 3.1.
11. 11. Rule 7(4)(b) of the Rules of Procedure is applicable when national authorities “initiate” a procedure which might lead to the disqualification of a Member from holding office. When the national procedure is over, Art. 12 of the Act of 1976 becomes applicable. If this interpretation of Rule 7(4)(b) is correct, the President of the European Parliament, who was informed by the French Government on 25 April 2000 of the adoption of the decree of 31 March 2000, should not have referred to this Rule and thus should not have asked for the opinion of the Legal Affairs Committee, as she did on 3 May 2000.
12. 12. Les Verts, cited supra note 5, at para 27.
13. 13. Case 34/86, Council v. European Parliament, [1986] ECR 2155.
14. 14. Joined Cases 358/85 & 51/86, France v. European Parliament, [1988] ECR 4821.
15. 15. Order, Case 78/85, Group of the European Right v. European Parliament, [1986] ECR 1753, at para 11.
16. 16. Order, Case C-68/90, Blot and National Front v. European Parliament, [1990] ECR I-2101, at para 11.
17. 17. Case 34/86, Council v. European Parliament, cited supra note 13.
18. 18. Joined Cases 358/85 & 51/86, France v. European Parliament, cited supra note 14.
19. 19. Case C-314/91, Beate Weber v. European Parliament, [1993] ECR I-1093, at para 11.
20. 20. Order, Case T-17/00 R, W. Rothley v. European Parliament, [2000] ECR II-2085, at para 54.
21. 21. Order, Case T-222/99 R, J.-C. Martinez and C. de Gaulle v. European Parliament, [1999] ECR II-3397.
22. 22. Order, Case T-236/00 R, Gabriele Stauner et al. v. European Parliament, Order of 15 Jan. 2001 nyr, at para 52.
23. 23. Case C-314/91, Beate Weber, supra note 19, at para 10.
24. 24. According to Rule 19(2) of the Rules of Procedure, on of the duties of the President is to “put matters to the vote and announce the results of the votes”. The President does not enjoy normative powers.
25. 25. A few minutes later, however, the President of the European Parliament said “that it is in fact Parliament which will officially take note of the decree and not its President”.
26. 26. Council of State, 6 Oct. 2000 supra note 1: “il résulte clairement de la combinaison de ces stipulations et dispositions [that is the Act of 1976 and the Rules of Procedure] que le pouvoir de refuser la vacance d'un siege, donne au Parlement europeen… ne peut s'exercer que dans les cas où le Parlement est appele a constater une telle vacance et non dans ceux ou. comme en l'espece, il peut seulement prendre acte. en vertu de l'article 12 de l'acte du 20 septembre 1976. de la vacance d'un siege resultant de dispositions nationales en vigueur dans un Etat membre”.
27. 27. See e.g. Order of the President. Case T-88/94 R. Société Commerciale des Potasses de l'Azote and Entreprise Minière et Chimique v. Commission. [1994] ECR 11-401. at para 30.