Request for the waiver of the immunity of Andris Ameriks

The European Parliament adopted by 410 votes to 182, with 10 abstentions, a decision not to waive the immunity of Andris Ameriks (S&D, LV).

As a reminder, the Prosecutor at the Anti-Corruption Coordination Section of the Criminal Justice Department of the Riga Public Prosecutor’s Office requested the waiver of the immunity of Andris Ameriks, Member of the European Parliament, elected in 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.

During the period from 22 July 2017 to 17 September 2017, Andris Ameriks, in his capacity as Deputy Mayor of Riga City Council, invested therefore with public authority in a position of responsibility, 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.

Andris Ameriks was elected to the European Parliament at the European elections in May 2019.

Parliament stated that the alleged offence does not concern opinions expressed or votes cast by Andris Ameriks in the performance of his duties as a Member of the European Parliament.

The investigation was not able to establish with certainty the precise place and time of the alleged offence. In addition, the offence of which Andris Ameriks is accused was allegedly committed in 2017 whereas the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Latvia did not submit the request for waiver of immunity until 23 May 2023. There is no convincing justification for such a delay in taking action.

Parliament stated that the concordance of this concrete evidence raises a serious doubt that the intention may have been to undermine Andris Ameriks’ political activity, and in particular his activity as a Member of the European Parliament. There are also 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.

Therefore, in this case, it would appear that fumus persecutionis can be assumed, i.e. there is ‘concrete evidence’ that the intention underlying the legal proceedings in question is to undermine Andris Ameriks’ political activity, including his activity as a Member of the European Parliament.

Against this background and in line with the recommendation of its Legal Affairs Committee, the European Parliament has decided not to waive the immunity of Andris Ameriks.