Fandom

VroniPlag Wiki

Wy/103

< Wy

31.268Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Seite hinzufügen
Diskussion0 Share

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.

Research on Parliamentary Privilege Concurrently Discuss Chinese National People's Congressional Privilege

von Weizhong Yi

vorherige Seite | zur Übersichtsseite | folgende Seite
Statistik und Sichtungsnachweis dieser Seite findet sich am Artikelende
[1.] Wy/Fragment 103 01 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-14 16:00:28 Graf Isolan
BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Griffith 1997, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wy

Typus
BauernOpfer
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 103, Zeilen: 1-10, 101
Quelle: Griffith 1997
Seite(n): 30, Zeilen: 8-17
[Mr Grove proposed adoption of a provision along the lines of section 17 of the federal Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth)314 which, for] the purposes of the Act, permits the Presiding Officers may certify as to whether any of the following are “proceedings in Parliament”:

a) A particular document prepared for the purpose of submission, and submitted to a House or a committee;

b) A particular document directed by a House or a committee to be treated as evidence taken in camera;

c) Certain oral evidence taken by a committee in camera; and

d) A document not published or authorised to be published by a House or a committee. The proposal was adopted by the Legislation Committee but not, it seems, by the NSW Law Reform Commission.315

It is, however, in other country, notably the UK, that the case law has developed. At issue are two related questions: Does the disputed evidence constitute parliamentary proceedings? If the proceedings are internal to Parliament, do they lie outside the jurisdiction of the courts?316


[314 Parliamentary Privileges Act1987, Section 17 (Certificates relating to proceedings): For the purposes of this Act, a certificate signed by or on behalf of the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives or a chairman of a committee stating that: (a) a particular document was prepared for the purpose of submission, and submitted, to a House or a committee; (b) a particular document was directed by a House or a committee to be treated as evidence taken in camera; (c) certain oral evidence was taken by a committee in camera; (d) a document was not published or authorised to be published by a House or a committee; (e) a person is or was an officer of a House; (f) an officer is or was required to attend upon a House or a committee; (g) a person is or was required to attend before a House or a committee on a day; (h) a day is a day on which a House or a committee met or will meet; or (i) a specified fine was imposed on a specified person by a House; is evidence of the matters contained in the certificate.]

315 NSWLRC, Report 75 - Defamation, September, 1995, p.174.

316 Gareth Griffith, Parliamentary Privilege: Major Developments and Current Issues, http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/publications.nsf/0/18DBE18C7D65CDF0CA2572D100091751/$File/ParliamentaryPrivelige07.pdf.

Mr Grove proposed adoption of a provision along the lines of section 17 of the federal Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth) which, for the purposes of the Act, permits the Presiding Officers may certify as to whether any of the following are ‘proceedings in Parliament’: (a) a particular document prepared for the purpose of submission, and submitted to a House or a committee; (b) a particular document directed by a House or a committee to be treated as evidence taken in camera; (c) certain oral evidence taken by a committee in camera; and (d) a document not published dor [sic] authorised to be published by a House or a committee. The proposal was adopted by the Legislation Committee119 but not, it seems, by the NSW Law Reform Commission.120

119 Ibid, p 62.

120 NSWLRC, Report 75 - Defamation, September 1995, p 174.

Anmerkungen

Art und Umfang der Übernahme sind ungekennzeichnet. Die Quelle wird nur für den letzten Absatz angeführt, der einen anderen Zusammenhang einleitet. Siehe http://de.vroniplag.wikia.com/wiki/Wy/Fragment_103_11

Übrigens hat Wy die Punkte, die er hier wiedergibt, bereits in einer Fußnote auf der vorangegangenen Seite wörtlich aufgelistet und wiederholt sich somit.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Agrippina1

[2.] Wy/Fragment 103 11 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-14 12:15:28 Graf Isolan
BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Griffith 2007, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wy

Typus
BauernOpfer
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 103, Zeilen: 11-21
Quelle: Griffith 2007
Seite(n): 59-60, Zeilen: 26-35;1-2
It is, however, in other country, notably the UK, that the case law has developed. At issue are two related questions: Does the disputed evidence constitute parliamentary proceedings? If the proceedings are internal to Parliament, do they lie outside the jurisdiction of the courts?316

In the UK case of R v Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, ex parte Al Fayed317 the Court of Appeal refused an application for judicial review of the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner which had rejected Al Fayed’s claim that an MP (Neil Hamilton) had received a corrupt payment. It was confirmed that the Commissioner’s inquiry and report were ‘proceedings in Parliament’. It is therefore the House of Commons, not the courts, which are responsible for the activities of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards. A contrast was drawn [in this respect between the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (the Ombudsman).]



316 Gareth Griffith, Parliamentary Privilege: Major Developments and Current Issues, [1].

317 [1998] 1 ALL ER 93.

It is, however, in other jurisdictions, notably the UK and Queensland, that the case law has

developed. At issue are two related questions: does the disputed evidence constitute parliamentary proceedings? if the proceedings are internal to Parliament do they lie outside the jurisdiction of the courts?

In the UK case of R v Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, ex parte Al Fayed213 the Court of Appeal refused an application for judicial review of the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner which had rejected Al Fayed’s claim that an MP (Neil Hamilton) had received a corrupt payment. It was confirmed that the Commissioner’s inquiry and report were ‘proceedings in Parliament’. It is therefore the House of Commons, not the courts, that are responsible for the activities of the Parliamentary Commissioner for [S. 60] Standards. A contrast was drawn in this respect between the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (the Ombudsman).


213 [1998] 1 ALL ER 93.

Anmerkungen

Art und Umfang der Übernahme bleiben ungekennzeichnet.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Singulus


vorherige Seite | zur Übersichtsseite | folgende Seite
Letzte Bearbeitung dieser Seite: durch Benutzer:Graf Isolan, Zeitstempel: 20130914160211

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki