What changed between the plenary report and the adopted text

Changed:– having heard Patryk Jaki on 23 March 20262026, in accordance with Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

Changed:F. whereas Article 9, first paragraph, point (a), of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union provides that, during the sessions of the European Parliament, its Members are to enjoy, in the territory of their own Member State, the immunities accorded to members of the parliament of their Member State;

Changed:A. whereas, by letter dated 6 August 2025, the District Court for Warsaw-Śródmieście submitted a request for the waiver of the immunity of Patryk Jaki, Member of the European Parliament elected in Poland, in relation to criminal proceedings brought before it for an alleged offence subject to a private prosecution;

Changed:B. whereas, according to the request, during the period from 5 June 2024 to 7 June 2024, acting in quick succession in pursuit of a premeditated plan, and with direct intent, Patryk Jaki allegedly slandered the private prosecutor – a judge – in the following manner: (i) during an election campaign meeting in Będzin on 5 June 2024, in an exchange with one of the persons present at the meeting, Patryk Jaki allegedly made statements about the private prosecutor allegingclaiming that hethe hadlatter unknowingly authorised the use of Pegasus spyware, and (ii) on 7 June 2024 Patryk Jaki then allegedly disseminated the recording of the exchange that took place during the election campaign meeting on 5 June 2024exchange throughout the country via mass media (i.e. the social media platforms Instagram, Facebook and X (Twitter)), allegingclaiming that the private prosecutor had neglected his duties as a judge related to performing unspecified ‘inquiries and checks’ regarding the method of operational surveillance in the context of considering requests for operational surveillance orders, that he improperly exercised his profession as a judge, and that he was biased due to his being under the influence of a political party;

Changed:G. whereas, pursuant to Article 105(2) and (5) of the PolishConstitution Constitution,of the Republic of Poland, from the day the election results are announced until the day their mandate expires, a deputy cannot be subjected to criminal accountability without the consent of the Sejm, and can be neither detained nor arrested without the consent of the Sejm, except in cases where they have been apprehended in the commission of an offence and in which their detention is necessary to secure the proper course of proceedings;

Changed:I. whereas, in accordance with Rule 5(2) of its Rules of Procedure, parliamentary immunity is not a Member’s personal privilege of the Member but a guarantee of the independence of Parliament as a whole and of its Members;

Changed:J. whereas, in this case, Parliament has found no evidence of fumus persecutionis, that is to say it does not appear that the intention underlying the legal proceedings in question is to underminedamage thePatryk Member’sJaki’s political activity as a Member of the European Parliament and thus Parliament’s independence;