Some UMP members require the possibility of prohibiting the return of young French parties do jihad abroad, and thus depart from the European law. Unable retorted the Minister of the Interior. . Explanations
The former minister Valérie Pécresse assured Monday on RTL: it is “possible” to prohibit the return of young French parties do jihad abroad, and in some cases, to “waive certain provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights.” An idea already discussed last week by the president of the UMP, Nicolas Sarkozy: “We must decide that when a few months to learn the use of arms, to destroy our democracy and our civilization, do not have to back, even when one is French, “said then the former head of state. An opinion shared by a majority (68%) of French, according to the Ifop poll for the JDD published Sunday.
Currently, section 2 of the Terrorism Act November 2014 already introduced the possibility of an administrative prohibition territory for a person with “a genuine, present and sufficiently serious”, but only for foreigners – even if they are from the European Union. This ban is a decision of the Minister of the Interior
While some members of the UMP and the National Front want to extend this measure, Bernard Cazeneuve is adamant. Prohibit the return of French or dual citizens in our territory is impossible because contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, which states (Article 3) that “no one shall be denied the right to enter the territory of the State of which he is a national “. “Except to take the risk of being sanctioned by the European Court of Human Rights, this article therefore precludes the return to France of French nationals is prohibited, whether or not another nationality” , told the minister in a letter sent Saturday to the president of the UMP, rather committing themselves to “intercept their return,” the French jihadists. As recalled Christophe Pettiti, lawyer and secretary general of the Institute of Human Rights of the Paris Bar, the European Convention was indeed a “supra-legislative value against the French nationa l law, so the judge in France could not implement such a measure. The responsibility of the French state would be initiated, it likely, in the worst cases, expulsion from the Council of Europe. “
The British example
” When we want we can, “insisted Valérie Pécresse on RTL. “The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) allows exceptions, which are justified by requirements of public order,” she said, citing the example of “British, who are part of the Council of Europe like us. ” Last November, in fact, Prime Minister David Cameron presented a whole anti-terrorism legislative framework, currently being discussed in Westminster. Among the measures, the possibility of preventing the return on British soil for at least two years, jihadists from combat zones. These retain their British nationality, in order not to be rendered stateless (which is contrary to international law), but will not return to Britain under strict conditions: they must be interviewed abroad by agents British, will be escorted back and agree to be judged, to be placed under house arrest and follow-radicalization measures. If they refuse, they could remain indefinitely outside th e country.
This is far from being passed. And the position of London – which currently raises questions about membership even the EU – is very different from that of France. As nevertheless emphasizes Christophe Pettiti, the “exceptions” that Valérie Pécresse speak are not impossible: Great Britain, for example, appealed after the 2005 London bombings, Article 15 of the Convention which states that “in case of war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation any High Contracting Party may take measures derogating from their obligations under this Convention to the extent strictly required by the situation and provided that such measures are not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law. ” However, continues the specialist in European law, “one can not derogate from everything and anything, and if the blur remains on bi-national, prevent the return of those who have the French nationality would remain impossible, even under Article 15, since it would go against the Universal Declaration of Human Rights “.
A measure that does not unanimous
On the side of the Socialist Party, no way derogate from European rules. “I would not want one of these individuals, after committing such acts can win before the international court”, believes the president (PS) of the National Assembly, Claude Bartolone. This measure is as far from unanimous on the right. The former Minister of Justice (UMP) Rachida Dati said she was “nuanced” Friday on the issue because it believes “it is a source of information that can allow some to return. We can get them back (…) put them under security surveillance or even preventive detention is action that I passed. ” Same story on the side of François Bayrou. “If you are the French intelligence services, and you have people coming back, having the will, on the contrary, to fight against what they saw there, repentant as we say (…) it must also be accommodated, “said the president of the modem when transmitting BFM Policy / RMC / Point Sunday.
Asked Monday on Europe 1, Gilles de Kerchove, the Belgian coordinator of the fight against terrorism in the European Union, for its part considers that “prohibit the return of a citizen, a citizen “,” seems legally difficult. What’s needed, and that is what seeks to Belgium (which provides a program of “reintegration and de-radicalization”, note), it is assessing the dangerousness of each individual. All should obviously not be sent to prison: we know how it is a radicalization incubator. We must send those who have blood on their hands; instead send others in the disengagement process. “
controversial topic, the return of jihadists appear to menu summit of heads of state and government of the EU on 12 February.
No comments:
Post a Comment