What changed between the plenary report and the adopted text

Changed:– having heard Harald Vilimsky on 15 April 20262026, in accordance with Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

Changed:F. whereas Article 57(2) and (3) of the Austrian Constitution states:provides that:

Changed:A. whereas the Permanent Representation of Austria to the European Union has forwardedtransmitted a request from the Prosecutor at the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Vienna for the waiver of the immunity of Harald Vilimsky, Member of the European Parliament,Parliament forelected allegedin actsAustria, ofin breachconnection ofwith trustalleged andacts embezzlement,of whichembezzlement, constituteconstituting offences under Article 153(1) and (3) of the Austrian Criminal Code, on the basis of his alleged participation in the offenceoffences within the meaning of Article 12 of that Code;

Changed:B. whereas, in accordanceaccording withto the request, following previous requests from the Vienna Public Prosecutor’s Office in Vienna in 2021 for the immunity of Harald Vilimsky to be waived,waived as well as the decision of the European Parliament of 11 November 2021 waiving his immunity, and in view of the emergence of new facts, it is appropriate for the waiver of the immunity of Harald Vilimsky also to be requested on the basis of thisthe new information;evidence ; whereas, according to information gathered from the investigation, Harald Vilimsky is suspected of having abused his power by committing the use ofusing funds fromof his political party FPÖ (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs – Die Freiheitlichen) for purposes unrelated to its activities,activities on dates in 2013 which have yet to be precisely established, in particular by authorising payments of a private nature and unrelated to the party’s activities,activities concerning the installation of a door and lock at Harald Vilimsky’shis private address, thereby causing damage amounting to a total of EUR 9 434.00434 to the FPÖ’s assets;

Changed:C. whereas Harald Vilimsky was elected to the European Parliament in the European elections of May 2019 European elections and re-elected in June 2024, and whereas hewas, wastherefore, not a Member of the European Parliament at the time of the alleged offences;

Changed:E. 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, Members of the Europeanits ParliamentMembers are to enjoy, in the territory of their own state,Member State, the immunities accorded to members of the parliament of their parliament;Member State;

Changed:‘2. The membersMembers of the National Council may on thebe groundarrested offor a criminal offense –only with the caseconsent of apprehension in the actNational ofCouncil, committingunless athey crimeare exceptedcaught –in bethe arrestedact onlyof withcommitting thea consentfelony. Members of the National Council.Council Likewise,are searchesalso ofimmune housesfrom ofany memberssearch of the Nationalpremises, Councilexcept requirewith the consent of the National Council.

Changed:3. OtherwiseIn all other cases, members of the National Council may only be officially prosecuted on account offor a punishablecriminal act,offence withwithout the consent of the National Council, if it hasCouncil obviouslyonly nowhere connectionthe withoffence theis officialmanifestly activityunconnected ofwith the deputymember’s inpolitical question.activity. However, the authoritiesprosecuting mustauthority seekshall obtain a rulingdecision from the National Council concerning the existenceon ofwhether such a connection exists if the deputymember concernedconcerned, or one third of the members of the standing committee dealingresponsible withfor thesuch casematters, demandso it.requests. InUpon such a request, the caseprosecuting ofauthority suchshall aimmediately demand,refrain anyfrom officialtaking prosecutingany action mustor immediatelydiscontinue ceaseany oraction bealready terminated.’;initiated.’;

Changed:G. whereas the purpose of the immunity provided for in Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities that are carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those;those duties;

Changed:H. whereas, in accordance with Rule 5(2) of the 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:I. whereas,whereas in this case, Parliament has found no evidence of fumus persecutionis, whichthat is to say factualit elementsdoes indicatingnot appear that the intention underlying the legal proceedings in question is to underminedamage Harald Vilimsky’s political activity in his capacity as a Member of the European Parliament;Parliament and thus Parliament’s independence;

Changed:J. whereas Parliament cannot assume the role of a court, andcourt whereas,and, in a waiver of immunity procedure, a Member cannot be regarded as a defendant;