The State Council said Wednesday that he refused to suspend the state of emergency declared after the November attacks, as requested by the League of Human Rights (LDH).
The judge considered in particular that “the imminent peril justifying state of emergency has not disappeared, given the continuation of the terrorist threat and the risk of attacks, “said a statement issued by the highest administrative court.
Tuesday to hearing, LDH had asked the State Council to “suspend all or part” of this exceptional regime and failing “to require the president to conduct a review of the circumstances of fact and law” that led to its implementation.
If it is declared competent to formulate a possible injunction president as an administrative authority, the judge however recalled that is out of his power to directly order a suspension of the state of emergency, the continuance of results from the law.
This issue is particularly sensitive when the government wants to extend for the second time and for another three months this plan, which was to end on February 26.
The bill extending the state of emergency will be debated and voted in the Senate on February 9 and February 16 at the National Assembly.
In his motivations, the judge found that “the attacks were repeated in France” since the introduction of state of emergency and that “France is still committed external military operations aimed at hitting the bases from which terrorist operations are prepared “.
These arguments were put forward at the hearing by the representative of the Ministry of Interior ., Pascale Leglise, who pleaded maintaining the state of emergency
– ‘A political trap’ –
The lawyer of LDH, Patrice Spinosi, as had its estimated that maintaining the state of emergency by a temporary nature, was no longer justified today. He spoke of a “political trap” in which the government is locked for fear of being accused of laxity in the event of another attack.
The state of emergency strengthens police powers by allowing including house arrest, administrative searches of day or night or prohibition of assembly, all without the supervision of a judicial court.
Questioned by AFP, Patrice Spinosi expressed speaking disappointment of defeat “for French Democracy”.
“This decision supports the theory that the rule is to maintain the state of emergency as there is a terrorist threat. This position can result in a permanent state of emergency “, he has argued, referring to” a gradual shift to a regime of exception “.
A group of associations and unions, dubbed” We will not give! “, has called for demonstrations on Saturday in Paris, fearing that the state of emergency does not become” a permanent state “.
” The LDH will continue to exercise vigilance and reserves the opportunity to re-enter the State Council, “warned Mr. Spinosi.
The prospect of extending the state of emergency had reacted on Monday Secretary General of the Council of Europe, who said his “concern” Francois Hollande which it has offered legal assistance.
“This shows that France can be sentenced tomorrow to the European Court of Human Rights. But it will take time, “said Patrice Spinosi. The lawyer also expressed its concern about the penal reform project to be presented Wednesday by the Council of Ministers.
” It is questionable whether this Bill does not seek to make the state of emergency without being in a state of emergency, giving more power to the administrative power at the expense of ordinary courts. Now, it is the judge who is the true guardian of fundamental freedoms because upstream appreciate the relevance of a coercive measure contrary to the administrative judge who controls a posteriori “.
The executive wants to register in the Constitution both the state of emergency and the controversial deprivation of nationality
1/27/2016 7:40:56 p.m.. – Paris (AFP) – By Pierre ROCHICCIOLI – © 2016 AFP
No comments:
Post a Comment