On 7 July 2026, the European Parliament adopted a decision to waive the parliamentary immunity of Siegbert Frank Droese, a German Member of the European Parliament, following a request from the German Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection. The waiver removes the parliamentary protection that would otherwise require the German Bundestag's permission for criminal proceedings against Mr. Droese, enabling the Dresden Regional Court to continue hearing his appeal against a conviction for insult by the Dresden Local Court.
The request was transmitted on 15 January 2026, after Mr. Droese lodged an appeal against the conviction. The Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs examined the case and recommended the waiver, concluding that the alleged offences occurred before Mr. Droese became an MEP and do not relate to opinions expressed or votes cast in his parliamentary duties. Therefore, the case falls outside the absolute immunity under Article 8 of Protocol No 7 on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union. Under Article 9 of the same protocol, MEPs enjoy the immunities accorded to members of their national parliament; for Germany, Article 46 of the Basic Law requires Bundestag permission for criminal proceedings against a member. The Parliament determined that there was no evidence of fumus persecutionis (intent to damage political activity).
The decision, based on Rules 5(2), 6(1), and 9 of Parliament's Rules of Procedure and relevant CJEU case law, reinforces the principle that parliamentary immunity is not a personal privilege but a guarantee of Parliament's institutional independence. It does not shield Members from legal proceedings for acts unrelated to their parliamentary duties. The Parliament instructed its President to forward the decision and the committee report to the competent German authority and to Mr. Droese.