Why not have resigned from December 23, 2015 when was presented in Council of Ministers the bill signing forfeiture in the Constitution?
Because I believe that we do not share in the din. I do not want the tumult of events blurs reading my departure, including that binds to the right pressure. Right, since May 17, 2012, asks my departure. Besides, if she is not careful, she will continue to request my resignation …
you retain hope of an abandonment or a rewriting of the text after December 23?
There are a part of that. I think there was a short window during which it was possible to take distance from what the president told Congress. Thus I have heard and understood his wishes of December 31 when he said that the debate was “legitimate” and it was up to Parliament to “take responsibility “. But I quickly understood however that, in essence, there would be no turning back and that since then we touched the heart of the republican idea of the right of nationality, my place was no longer in government.
In your book, you are shown as still Keeper. Does this mean that you wrote it thinking to stay in office after its release?
My formal decision to leave is prior to the publication of the book, even though I will not tell you precise date. But in my total loyalty report in respect of the President of the Republic, I chose to keep my editor in ignorance by not warning him that I would not be the Minister of Justice at the time of publication of the book .
Is it normal that a sitting minister spends time writing a book to challenge a measure of government?
The time I have for write looks no one, unless it demonstrates to me that I have not done my job. For forty-five months I spent my days, my nights and weekends to work. This criticism is meaningless.
You seem very anxious not to appear as an opponent of the President of the Republic in the coming months?
I not ask me opponent. I went on a major political disagreement. And if I wrote this book is because I felt that I had a few sentences uttered here and there were not enough given the importance of the subject. But I want to be clear: I am very respectful of the presidential office. When a company is in a moment of doubt and fragility, it is necessary that institutions are strong and powerful.
Do you not feel that they have had a capacity ‘derisory response relative to average required by the French justice?
The poor thought argues that in terms of means. Yes, justice was in a state of devastation when I arrived. The recruitment of new magistrates were 144 per year. In my first year, I opened 358 positions and it went crescendo in 2016, I opened 530 seats! We recruit clerks 700 per year. Now there are more arrivals magistrates court only to retirements. The budget increased from € 430 million in three years and surpassed 8 billion. I want to hear that justice was never far from the brink, but those who work there really know the difference since 2012.
About Reform juvenile justice, did you have assurances from the president on its inclusion in the 2016 agenda?
Yes.
When you write that it is necessary to use intelligence to understand where terrorism, is it a response to Manuel Valls, January 9, said that the matter “explain is already wanting a little excuse “
My concern is not to disagree with so and so. For three and a half years, I am asked if I disagree with Manuel Valls. Disagreements exist is indisputable. But when they occurred, I have requested arbitration, thus democracy. I do not write a book to answer Mr Valls. I appeal to the youth.
On the bottom of your question, yes, sociological tools are needed. It is urgent to understand what is happening in society if we are to act. Sees the policy does not try to understand? She would take the risk of inappropriate and ineffective action. My concern is to dry up the recruitment breeding ground for terrorism. We will not succeed by threatening people who are determined to die. My position is based on principles which do not depend on people passing by. We all go. Action must be anchored and durable. The rest is ephemeral, even the life of a five-year term.
There are eight days, again Minister, you estimiez legitimate concerns over the place left to the courts by the government?
I was referring court judge. I do not question the administrative judge. It is picky about respect for freedoms. It is to him that returns control of the actions of governments and government. But from the time the legislature extends the scope of administrative action, in particular to respond to the circumstances, one must wonder about whether the solution is the automatic increase in the scope of the administrative court. Our democracy must take the time to reflect on these changes in scope. During consideration of the bill on intelligence, and I struggled at times against a part of the Law Commission to introduce a judicial review beautiful.
The fact that it is Specifically the former chairman of the Law Committee Jean-Jacques Urvoas, who succeeded Vendôme you, is it fear for the defense of freedoms?
There is no antagonism between security and preservation of freedoms. The ministry of justice is the guarantor of freedoms. I have no comment on Mr. Urvoas. You will judge him on his actions.
What do you expect the parliamentary debate which begins Friday?
I hope deprivation of nationality will not be recorded in the Constitution. Yes, I very much hope that the left will not have to take such a decision.
You hope, but do you believe in?
I am not alone at work. There is a momentum. I’ve seen yet archi loyal deputies against the majority have the courage to write in this sense stands in the press of their constituency. The left, this is not a Bonapartist leader! It is a movement and a sense of collective deliberation.
What is your program for the coming months? Your plans for 2017 while some are already wondering if you might consider to be a candidate? Do not you afraid to regret your departure from the government?
Do not worry for me, I will have no blues, although it is obviously difficult to leave when a ministry comes harvesting fruit of the work. But I was not alone in doing so and this frustration can be shared by my teams.
Interview by Jean-Baptiste Jacquin and Thomas Wieder
No comments:
Post a Comment