Parliamentary Immunity: Comparative Conceptual Analysis in Romania and France

This paper aims to investigate, from an interdisciplinary and intercultural point of view, the concept of parliamentary immunity. Thus, the main objective of the research is to identify the historical premises and the political, linguistic and legal means by which the concept of parliamentary immunity has marked the main intellectual events since its insertion in Romania and France. In Latin, the term had relatively demarcated meanings in the sphere of fiscal issues. Later on, because of its metaphorical flexibility, the term began to be used in spheres of law, medicine, politics, constitutionalism and economy. Because of its usage in many fields, the concept gains in importance and enters in everyday language, becoming a catch-word. Whether we are talking about immunité parlementaire in France, immunität în Germany, immunitet in Poland or imunitate parlamentară in Romania, the term underwent an extensive debate on its institutional means and legal aspects. Therefore, this research will no longer insist on these classical interpretations, but will develop, in extenso a comparative conceptual study based on methodological rigor guided around the following questions: When and in what form did the parliamentary immunity appear in Romania and France? How was the concept built in Romania and France? The comparative analysis is justified by witnessing a cultural, legal, and political transfer from France to Romania, which represents a fertile ground for a conceptual analysis of the parliamentary immunity. France is for Romania a source of inspiration and moreover, parliamentary immunity in Romania was adopted from the French tradition, attentive to the status and privileges of the parliamentary elites. This paper will emphasize the importance of the concept after its entry into national languages, but also the political uses of the term, its expansion into Philosophy of History and finally, an overview of the present usage of the term.