Fandom

VroniPlag Wiki

Quelle:Wy/Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege - Need 1999

< Quelle:Wy

31.268Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Seite hinzufügen
Diskussion0

Störung durch Adblocker erkannt!


Wikia ist eine gebührenfreie Seite, die sich durch Werbung finanziert. Benutzer, die Adblocker einsetzen, haben eine modifizierte Ansicht der Seite.

Wikia ist nicht verfügbar, wenn du weitere Modifikationen in dem Adblocker-Programm gemacht hast. Wenn du sie entfernst, dann wird die Seite ohne Probleme geladen.

Angaben zur Quelle [Bearbeiten]

Titel    Chapter 1: The Need for a Review
Sammlung    Parliamentary Privilege First Report
Herausgeber    UK Parliament, House of Lords and House of Commons: Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege
Datum    30. März 1999
Anmerkung    Session 1998-99, Datum der Drucklegung: 30.3.1999
ISBN    0 10 432799 5
URL    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/4305.htm; erster archivalishcer Nachweis 2000: http://web.archive.org/web/20001121054600/http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/4305.htm

Literaturverz.   

ja
Fußnoten    ja
Fragmente    3


Fragmente der Quelle:
[1.] Wy/Fragment 018 04 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-15 21:45:55 WiseWoman
Fragment, Gesichtet, Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege - Need 1999, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung, Wy

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 18, Zeilen: 4-8
Quelle: Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege - Need 1999
Seite(n): 1 (Internetquelle), Zeilen: -
The origins of parliamentary privilege are to be found chiefly in ancient practice, asserted by Parliament and accepted over time by the Crown and the courts as the law and custom of Parliament. Some of the Commons ancient privileges, such as freedom from arrest, were claimed from the Sovereign and upheld with his consent.62 Other privileges were established by Parliament itself.

62 See, Erskine May, 22nd ed., pp.72-78.

5. The sources of parliamentary privilege are to be found chiefly in ancient practice, asserted by Parliament and accepted over time by the Crown and the courts as the law and custom of Parliament.[51] [...] Some of the Commons ancient privileges, such as freedom from arrest, were claimed from the Sovereign and upheld with his consent.[52] Other privileges were established by Parliament itself.

51 5 Hatsell, Precedents of Proceedings in the House of Commons (1818), vol 1, p 2.

52 6 Erskine May, 22nd edition (1997) pp 72-78, and the authorities cited therein; GR Elton, The Parliament of England 1559-1581, (1986) p 333; Cassidy v Steuart (1841) 133 ER 817.

Anmerkungen

Kein Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan), WiseWoman

[2.] Wy/Fragment 168 03 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-15 21:51:23 WiseWoman
Fragment, Gesichtet, Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege - Need 1999, KomplettPlagiat, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wy

Typus
KomplettPlagiat
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 168, Zeilen: 6-24
Quelle: Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege - Need 1999
Seite(n): 1 (Internetquelle), Zeilen: -
Over the last century or more the House of Lords has seldom been troubled by complaints of breach of privilege. This has not been true of the House of Commons, where even in the present century there have been frequent complaints of breach of privilege, meaning contempt, some of which appear in retrospect to have been trivial and unworthy. It took the House ten years formally to accept the advice of the 1967 committee that it should be less sensitive in reacting to alleged contempts. In 1977 the House decided: “Its penal jurisdiction should be exercised (a) in any event as sparingly as possible, and (b) only when the House is satisfied that to exercise it is essential in order to provide reasonable protection for the House, its members or its officers, from such improper obstruction or attempt at or threat of obstruction as is causing, or is likely to cause, substantial interference with the performance of their respective functions”.514

In practice, the House of Commons now treats as contempt only serious breaches of rules by its own members or obstruction by others which it believes interfere seriously with the work of the House or its members. Actions constituting a prima facie contempt nevertheless still cover a wide area: from leaking a draft report of a select committee, or serving a subpoena on a member within the precincts of the House, to intimidating a witness before a committee or bribing a member.


514 CJ (1977-78) 170, agreeing to paragraph 4 of the Third Report from the Committee of Privileges, HC (1976-77) 417.

20. Over the last century or more the House of Lords has seldom been troubled by complaints of breach of privilege. This has not been true of the House of Commons, where even in the present century there have been frequent complaints of breach of privilege, meaning contempts, some of which appear in retrospect to have been trivial and unworthy. It took the House ten years formally to accept the advice of the 1967 committee that it should be less sensitive in reacting to alleged contempts. In 1977 the House decided:

`its penal jurisdiction should be exercised (a) in any event as sparingly as possible, and (b) only when the House is satisfied that to exercise it is essential in order to provide reasonable protection for the House, its members or its officers, from such improper obstruction or attempt at or threat of obstruction as is causing, or is likely to cause, substantial interference with the performance of their respective functions'.[78]

21. This has markedly reduced the number of occasions when the House or a committee of privileges has considered such matters. In practice the House of Commons now treats as a contempt only serious breaches of rules by its own members or obstruction by others which it believes interfere seriously with the work of the House or its members. Actions constituting a prima facie contempt nevertheless still cover a wide area: from leaking a draft report of a select committee, or serving a subpoena on a member within the precincts of the House, to intimidating a witness before a committee or bribing a member.


78 CJ (1977-78) 170, agreeing to paragraph 4 of the Third Report from the Committee of Privileges, HC (1976-77) 417.

Anmerkungen

Kein Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan), WiseWoman

[3.] Wy/Fragment 169 01 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-15 21:54:02 WiseWoman
BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege - Need 1999, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wy

Typus
BauernOpfer
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 169, Zeilen: 1-9
Quelle: Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege - Need 1999
Seite(n): 1 (Internetquelle), Zeilen: -
In the past the House of Commons frequently, and the House of Lords less often, exercised their power to commit non-members for conduct perceived as an offence and adjudged as a contempt. Offenders were committed either to the custody of Black Rod or the Serjeant-at-Arms or directly to one of Her Majesty’s prisons. By the mid-nineteenth century both Parliament and the courts were becoming uneasy about the exercise of this power without any procedure for review. The power of committal has not been exercised by the House of Lords since early in the nineteenth century and not by the House of Commons since 1880.515

515 UK Parliament, Reports of the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/4302.htm.

22. In the past the House of Commons frequently, and the House of Lords less often, exercised their power to commit non-members for conduct perceived as an offence and adjudged as a contempt. Offenders were committed either to the custody of Black Rod or the Serjeant-at-Arms or directly to one of Her Majesty's prisons. By the mid-nineteenth century both Parliament and the courts were becoming uneasy about the exercise of this power without any procedure for review. The power of committal has not been exercised by the House of Lords since early in the nineteenth century and not by the House of Commons since 1880[79] (although the latter has contemplated using the power on several occasions since then).

79 See paragraphs 271, 300 below.

Anmerkungen

Art und Umfang der Übernahme bleiben ungekennzeichnet.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan), WiseWoman

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki