von Weizhong Yi
Statistik und Sichtungsnachweis dieser Seite findet sich am Artikelende
| [1.] Wy/Fragment 008 01 - Diskussion Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-10 19:09:45 Hindemith | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wright 2007, Wy |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 8, Zeilen: 1-19, 101-103 |
Quelle: Wright 2007 Seite(n): 10, 13, Zeilen: 10:5-18; 13:1.12.16-21 |
|---|---|
| [The] laws establishing these bodies do not tie their privileges and immunities to Westminster, but instead of setting out in detail the provisions which apply. In each case, statements made during proceedings in parliament are absolutely privileged for the purposes of defamation: that they cannot form the basis of an action in defamation. But actions such as incitement to racial hatred are not protected. Proceedings are subject to the law of contempt of court (that is, conduct that tends to interfere with the course of justice in certain proceedings), although the usual provision of strict liability for contempt of court does not apply to publications made in the course of proceedings in relation to a bill or subordinate legislation, or to the extent that they consist of a fair and accurate report of proceedings, made in good faith. These legislative bodies have not been given the broad power to punish contempt.24
2.1.4 Parliamentary Privilege in British Model’s Nations 2.1.4.1 The United States In Article I, Section 6, the United States Constitution (1787) provides that Members of Congress: Shall in all cases, except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place. 24 Government of Wales Act 1998, S.77; Scotland Act 1998, S. 41; Scottish Parliament Business Bulletin,38/1999, http://www.scottish.parliament.uk; The ACT Legislative Assembly, another relatively recent parlia-ment, has not been given the power to punish contempts. |
[Seite 10]
The laws establishing these bodies do not tie their privileges and immunities to Westminster, but instead set out in detail the provisions which apply. In each case, statements made during proceedings in parliament are absolutely privileged for the purposes of defamation: that is they cannot form the basis of an action in defamation. But actions such as incitement to racial hatred are not protected. Proceedings are subject to the law of contempt of court (that is, conduct that tends to interfere with the course of justice in certain proceedings), although the usual provision of strict liability for contempt of court does not apply to publications made in the course of proceedings in relation to a bill or subordinate legislation, or to the extent that they consist of a fair and accurate report of proceedings, made in good faith. These legislative bodies have not been given the broad power to punish contempts45. [Seite 13] 5. Adaptation of traditional provisions [...] The USA [...] Article 1(6) provided: The Senators and Representatives….. shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place. 45 Government of Wales Act 1998, s 77; Scotland Act 1998, s 41; Scottish Parliament Business Bulletin, 38/1999 (available at www.scottish.parliament.uk). The ACT Legislative Assembly, another relatively recent parliament, has not been given the power to punish contempts. |
Kein Hinweis auf eine Übernahme. |
|
Letzte Bearbeitung dieser Seite: durch Benutzer:Hindemith, Zeitstempel: 20130910191113