Matière Préliminaire -- Introduction -- Chapitre 1. Les Versions Du Texte Et Leur Transmission Écrite Et Orale -- Chapitre 2. Les Versions Écrites Et Orales Du Ta:Rikh Mandinka Présentées En Colonnes -- Chapitre 3. Sujets Mythiques Et Historiques Du Ta:Rikh Mandinka (Interprétations Et Commentaires Comparés) -- Chapitre 4. Contextes De Production Et De Transmission Des Livres De Bijini : Historiographie Et Discours Social Dans Un Village Musulman Au Pays Des Sòoninkee Du Kaabu Et Du Badoora -- Tableaux -- Images -- Cartes -- Ta:Rikh Mandinka : La Reproduction De Deux Manuscrits Arabes En Possession De Al-Hajj Ibrahiima « Koobaa » Kasama – Ms A (18 Pp), Ms B (35 Pp) -- Glossaire Des Anthroponymes Et Toponymes Et Des Termes En Mandinka Et Autres Langues -- Bibliographie -- Index Des Auteurs Cités.
Verfügbarkeit an Ihrem Standort wird überprüft
Dieses Buch ist auch in Ihrer Bibliothek verfügbar:
The article analyses the notes, which were prepared by provisional investigation commissions formed by the Seimas, in which it was suggested that the Seimas should either agree or disagree on the abolition of the immunity of a Member of the Seimas. In the opinion of the author, an analysis of these notes permits to assert that these notes often have essential drawbacks: the notes contain insufficient arguments following which the commission substantiates its proposal that the Seimas should not give its consent to hold a Member of the Seimas criminally liable, to arrest him or restrict he freedom otherwise; at times such notes do not contain any such arguments at all; sometimes the commissions exceed the powers granted to them and undertake functions which are not characteristic of such commissions. The Constitution establishes the immunity of a Member of the Seimas not for the purpose that a Member of the Seimas who committed a crime could avoid criminal liability, but that he would not be held criminally liable in the absence of legal grounds, that he would not be persecuted for political or other similar reasons, and that no influence (which is prohibited by the Constitution) would be exerted on him due to his activity in the capacity of a Member of the Seimas.
The article analyses the notes, which were prepared by provisional investigation commissions formed by the Seimas, in which it was suggested that the Seimas should either agree or disagree on the abolition of the immunity of a Member of the Seimas. In the opinion of the author, an analysis of these notes permits to assert that these notes often have essential drawbacks: the notes contain insufficient arguments following which the commission substantiates its proposal that the Seimas should not give its consent to hold a Member of the Seimas criminally liable, to arrest him or restrict he freedom otherwise; at times such notes do not contain any such arguments at all; sometimes the commissions exceed the powers granted to them and undertake functions which are not characteristic of such commissions. The Constitution establishes the immunity of a Member of the Seimas not for the purpose that a Member of the Seimas who committed a crime could avoid criminal liability, but that he would not be held criminally liable in the absence of legal grounds, that he would not be persecuted for political or other similar reasons, and that no influence (which is prohibited by the Constitution) would be exerted on him due to his activity in the capacity of a Member of the Seimas.