Friday, July 15, 2016

Justice rejects the request for Abdeslam Salah, who did not want to be filmed 24H / 24 in prison – The Point

The cameras filming Salah Abdeslam round the clock in his cell they are a serious infringement of his fundamental rights? No, responded Friday administrative judges rejecting the request of the jihadist, asking the suspension of the device.

The attacks of 13 November, the worst committed in France, “require making exceptional arrangements to insure against the risk “of escape or suicide the only member still alive commandos, note in their order the three judges hearing the application (emergency procedure) of the administrative court of Versailles.

prisoner most watched France, Abdeslam Salah, 26, is held in solitary confinement in Fleury-Merogis (Essonne), the largest prison in Europe, in a specially equipped cell under constant surveillance cameras, two in his cell, others in the gym and during his walk.

It is then a “manifestly illegal and serious breach of privacy,” said his lawyer Frank Berton, who had asked at the hearing Wednesday the suspension of the ministerial decision of June 17, which directs its implementation under video surveillance 24 hours and 24 for three months.

the tenor Lille also attacked the order made by the Minister of Justice Jean-Jacques Urvoas June 9, 2016, allowing the establishment of such a device. Such measures should be regulated by law and not by a simple decree, he had argued, based on the Constitution, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights on the right to respect for life . private and notice of the national Commission on informatics and liberties (CNIL)

the judges felt that an order could be enough according to European case law – particularly as Abdeslam Salah was able to to read at a “contradictory” procedure -. but not according to French law

– Ministerial Order “illegal” –

In language “extremely cautious”, reports a source judicial, they question the ministerial decision of 17 June 2016, “adopted on the basis of the order of 9 June 2016, which would be illegal because ignoring the competence entrusted to the legislator” by the Constitution.

“If the court told me that what I did is no sufficient legal basis, well, I will seek a satisfactory basis, by law”, had said on Wednesday the Minister of Justice Jean-Jacques Urvoas.

However, the fact that this order is illegal is not sufficient to establish that there is “a serious violation” of privacy Salah Abdeslam, qualify the judges.

in addition while this constant surveillance “crazy making” Abdeslam, in its defense, the judges state that it has “never” requested a visit to a doctor, including a psychiatrist, and that “out of respect for the privacy (was considered) by installing a privacy protection fixed in the cell for the return of clouded pictures “at health.

There was not a matter to request urgently conclude the judges, who sat unusually three instead of one.

arrested March 18 in Belgium after the run for more than four months, transferred to France on April 27 Salah Abdeslam has so far refused to explain. According to his defense, “he spends his time talking to the cameras.”

A visit to Fleury-Merogis June 29 LR MP Thierry Solère had angered counsel jihadist. The elected had access to the Abdeslam video room and described what he saw in the Journal Sunday, brushing teeth to prayer of the inmate. “He has no privacy, it has a public life”, said Mr. Berton at the hearing.

Questioned by AFP, the lawyer indicated that he wished ” consult with his client whether they would appeal to the State Council. ” Wednesday, he had said he would appeal if the court were to reject his application

07/15/2016 4:37:06 p.m. -. Versailles (AFP) – AFP © 2016


No comments:

Post a Comment