Plenary report, 9 April 2024

On the request for waiver of the immunity of Nils Ušakovs

Report A-9-2024-0167 · (2023/2091(IMM))

Committee on Legal Affairs · Rapporteur: Gilles Lebreton

Where the law stands · dossier 2023/2091 →

AI:In short

The Committee on Legal Affairs reports on a request from the Riga Public Prosecutor's Office to waive the immunity of Nils Ušakovs, a Member of the European Parliament elected for Latvia. The request concerns alleged bribery, fraud and other offences said to have been committed in 2017 when he was Mayor of Riga City Council. The committee finds serious doubts about the evidence and procedure, and concrete evidence that the intention was to undermine his political activity, so it decides not to waive his immunity.

Position. The Committee on Legal Affairs proposes that Parliament decide not to waive the immunity of Nils Ušakovs, finding serious doubts about the evidence and procedure and concrete evidence that the intention was to undermine his political activity.

Key points

The Prosecutor at the Anti-Corruption Coordination Section of the Riga Public Prosecutor's Office asked Parliament to waive the immunity of Nils Ušakovs to bring criminal proceedings against him.
The alleged offences are obtaining a bribe, fraud on a large scale in an organised group, and intentional acts causing serious consequences under the Latvian Criminal Code.
The alleged conduct took place from 22 July 2017 to 17 September 2017, when Nils Ušakovs was Mayor of Riga City Council.
The alleged offence does not concern opinions expressed or votes cast in the performance of his parliamentary duties.
Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in their own state, the immunities accorded to members of their national parliament.
Under the Latvian Constitution, members of the Saeima may not be arrested or prosecuted without its consent.
Parliament cannot act as a court, and a Member cannot be regarded as a defendant in a waiver of immunity procedure.
The purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings over activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties.
The investigation could not establish with certainty the precise place and time of the alleged offences.
The offences were allegedly committed in 2017, but the request for waiver of immunity was not submitted until 23 May 2023, with no convincing justification for the delay.
There are uncertainties about the evidence and serious doubts about the procedure, including the motivation behind the request.
The committee finds concrete evidence that the intention was to undermine his political activity, so it decides not to waive his immunity.

Who is affected

Nils Ušakovs, Member of the European Parliament elected for Latvia: his immunity is not waived.
The Riga Public Prosecutor's Office and the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Latvia: their request for waiver is refused.

Figures and deadlines

22 July 2017 to 17 September 2017: period of the alleged conduct.
50%: share of the amounts the minibus transport company received from Riga City Council that was allegedly demanded as a bribe.
May 2019: European elections at which Nils Ušakovs was elected to the European Parliament.
24 May 2023: date of the request for waiver of immunity.
23 May 2023: date the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Latvia submitted the request for waiver of immunity.

Legal basis. Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage.

Written by AI from the full text · every figure comes from the text · ¶ opens the paragraph · 25 Sept 2026 · Report a problem

Full text

Proposal for a european parliament decision 30 paragraphs

(2023/2091(IMM))

The European Parliament,

–having regard to the request for waiver of the immunity of Nils Ušakovs submitted by the Prosecutor at the Anti-Corruption Coordination Section of the Criminal Justice Department of the Riga Public Prosecutor’s Office, dated 24 May 2023 and transmitted on the same date by the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Latvia, in the context of criminal proceedings to be initiated in the Republic of Latvia, and announced in plenary on 14 June 2023,

–having heard Nils Ušakovs in accordance with Rule 9(6) of its Rules of Procedure,

–having regard to Articles 8 and 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union, and Article 6(2) of the Act of 20 September 1976 concerning the election of the members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage,

–having regard to Articles 29 and 30 of the Latvian Constitution,

–having regard to the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of 21 October 2008, 19 March 2010, 6 September 2011, 17 January 2013 and 19 December 2019,

–having regard to Rule 5(2), Rule 6(1) and Rule 9 of its Rules of Procedure,

–having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs (A9-0167/2024),

A.whereas the Prosecutor at the Anti-Corruption Coordination Section of the Criminal Justice Department of the Riga Public Prosecutor’s Office has requested the waiver of the immunity of Nils Ušakovs, Member of the European Parliament, elected for Latvia, with a view to bringing criminal proceedings against him for a criminal offence of obtaining a bribe before committing an unlawful act in the interest of a third party by using his official position, the offence of acquiring property of another by the use, in bad faith, of trust and deceit (fraud), on a large scale and in an organised group, and, finally, as a public official holding a position of responsibility and using his official position in bad faith, committing intentional acts with intent to cause serious consequences, pursuant to Article 177(3), Article 318(3), Article 15(4) and Article 320(4) of the Latvian Criminal Code;

B.whereas, during the period from 22 July 2017 to 17 September 2017, Nils Ušakovs, in his capacity as Mayor of Riga City Council, invested therefore with public authority in a position of responsibility, and representative of Riga City Council as a shareholder in Riga Transport, among other things allegedly demanded a bribe from the indirect owner of a minibus transport company equivalent to 50% of the amounts which that company received from Riga City Council for carrying passengers entitled to concessionary fares;

C.whereas Nils Ušakovs was elected to the European Parliament at the European elections in May 2019;

Read the rest (18 paragraphs)

D. whereas the alleged offence does not concern opinions expressed or votes cast by Nils Ušakovs in the performance of his duties, pursuant to Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union;

E. whereas Article 9 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union provides that Members of the European Parliament enjoy, in the territory of their own state, the immunities accorded to members of their parliament;

F.whereas Article 29 and Article 30 of the Latvian Constitution state:

‘Article 29

Members of the Saeima shall not be arrested, nor shall their premises be searched, nor shall their personal liberty be restricted in any way without the consent of the Saeima. (...)

Article 30

Without the consent of the Saeima, criminal prosecution may not be commenced and administrative fines may not be levied against its members’;

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

H. whereas the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect Parliament and its Members from legal proceedings in relation to activities carried out in the performance of parliamentary duties and which cannot be separated from those duties;

I.whereas Nils Ušakovs could not have carried out this criminal offence, i.e. receipt of a bribe, allegedly because the indirect owner of the minibus transport company did not agree to pay such a large sum;

J. whereas the investigation was not able to establish with certainty the precise place and time of the alleged offences;

K.whereas the offences of which Nils Ušakovs is accused were allegedly committed in 2017, and whereas the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Latvia did not submit the request for waiver of immunity until 23 May 2023; whereas there is no convincing justification for such a delay in taking action;

L.whereas on the basis of the information and explanations provided in the present case, including the answers given by the Deputy Public Prosecutor of the Republic of Latvia during the exchange of views with him, there are uncertainties as to the evidence on which the request for waiver of immunity is based and serious doubts surrounding the procedure, including the motivation underlying the request for waiver of immunity;

M.whereas it follows from CJEU case-law that Parliament has a ‘broad discretion when deciding whether to grant or to refuse a request for waiver of immunity (...), owing to the political nature of such a decision’;

N.whereas the concordance of this concrete evidence raises a serious doubt that the intention may have been to undermine Nils Ušakovs’ political activity, including, therefore, his activity as a Member of the European Parliament;

O.whereas it would therefore appear that, in this instance, fumus persecutionis can be assumed, i.e. there is ‘concrete evidence’ that the intention underlying the legal proceedings in question is to undermine his political activity, and in particular his activity as a Member of the European Parliament;

1.Decides not to waive the immunity of Nils Ušakovs;

2.Instructs its President to forward this decision, and the report of its committee responsible, immediately to the appropriate authority of the Republic of Latvia and to Nils Ušakovs.

Annex: list of entities or persons from whom the rapporteur has received input 1 paragraph

The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

Information on adoption in committee responsible 1 paragraph

Date adopted	8.4.2024
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	14 1 0
Members present for the final vote	Gunnar Beck, Ibán García Del Blanco, Virginie Joron, Sergey Lagodinsky, Gilles Lebreton, Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques, Karen Melchior, Sabrina Pignedoli, Adrián Vázquez Lázara, Axel Voss, Marion Walsmann, Javier Zarzalejos
Substitutes present for the final vote	Guy Lavocat, Antonius Manders, Nacho Sánchez Amor