Proposition 51K1559

Projet de loi visant à compléter la protection pénale des mineurs.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP MR Open Vld Vooruit Purple Ⅰ

Submission date

Jan. 14, 2005

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

violence juvenile delinquency child protection infancy delinquency criminal law

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V Vooruit LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA MR FN VB

Abstained from voting

Ecolo

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

⚠️ Possible data error ⚠️

This proposition could possibly include unrelated discussions due to a heuristic extraction bug in propositions prior to 2007. As soon as I've got time to fix it, these will be removed when they're not supposed to be here.

Discussion ¶

April 21, 2005 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, dear colleagues, the Justice Committee has devoted six sessions to the examination of the bills submitted to us today, namely the one amending various provisions in order to strengthen the fight against human trafficking and trafficking in human beings and the one aimed at supplementing the criminal protection of minors. The committee decided to examine these two bills in a single general discussion, since these projects are closely linked.

The first project, therefore, concerns trafficking and trafficking in human beings and pursues several objectives.

First, a first set of provisions aims to make the necessary changes to the incriminations of trafficking and trafficking in human beings in order to bring our law into conformity with instruments of international and European law, in particular with regard to the thresholds of punishment provided for in European framework decisions, as well as the distinction between the incrimination of trafficking and the incrimination of trafficking. From now on, the incrimination of trafficking in human beings will no longer be limited to only foreigners, as provided for in the current article 77bis of the law of 15 December 1980 on access to the territory; it will also target Belgians.

A new article 433quinquies defines what is to be understood by trafficking and explicitly targets a series of forms of exploitation, whether sexual – such as pornography, debauchery, prostitution – or economic – such as labour exploitation, begging, organ trafficking, etc. - in order to comply with the aforementioned European instruments and the UN Protocol on Trafficking in Human Beings. Simultaneously, Article 77bis of the 1980 Act was amended to target specifically and exclusively trafficking in human beings. Add that amendments have also been filed to incriminate the attempt, both in terms of exploitation of begging and trafficking and trafficking in human beings.

A second part of the provisions deals with the exploitation of begging. It is not about recriminalising the crime of begging, but – a little like what exists in the field of prostitution – to punish the one who exploits the begging of others. In this sense, aggravating circumstances have been envisaged, when the beggar is a minor, that the perpetrator exploits a particular precariousness such as illness, disability or when he has authority over the beggar.

Another important measure, which has been the subject of numerous discussions in committees, aims to reintroduce in the Criminal Code the provision of article 77bis § 1 er bis of the 1980 law concerning the so-called sleep merchants, the purpose of this modification being to extend to all the protection against sleep merchants. This offence is now considered independently and no longer as a particular form of trafficking in human beings.

The second draft law on the criminal protection of minors, which aims to amend the Criminal Code to punish more severely those who use minors to commit offences. Indeed, taking into account the specific approach that minors benefit from under the Youth Protection Act, these adults hope to escape prosecution, while continuing to reap the fruits of crimes committed by minors but for their own account.

A new article of the Criminal Code, to be read in conjunction with Article 66 relating to co-authors, should allow to raise in a relative and consistent manner the minimum penalty for each offence and each crime provided for in the Criminal Code. An additional increase may also take place if specific aggravating circumstances so require.

In addition, in the context of the debates, various bills were taken into account, including that of Ms. Hilde Claes punishing persons who use minors to commit a crime or a crime, that of Ms. Nahima Lanjri and MM. Tony Van Parys and Servais Verherstraeten amending the Criminal Code, in order to expand the scope of incriminating the practices of sleep merchants.

It is also worth adding the Bill No. 640 relating to the exploitation of begging which is originally a bill proposed by Mrs. de T'Serclaes.

During the general discussion, it appeared that the democratic parties as a whole fully endorsed the different objectives pursued by the two bills.

Nevertheless, some questions have been raised, in particular regarding a project provision concerning sleep merchants. Thus, the CD&V, while subscribing to the objectives of this article, was concerned about the absence of a provision providing for the relocation of Belgian victims from sleep merchants, while this is provided in the 1980 law for foreigners. An amendment has been submitted to ensure the parallelism.

The MR group, for its part, expressed its concerns that some owners are now hesitant, if the terms of the law are not further specified, to rent their buildings. It also asked about possible conflicts of competence with existing regional legislation on the subject.

The VLD group was concerned about the fines imposed on sleep merchants, which are calculated based on the number of victims, and the risk, if they are many, of not being able to obtain damages if as a result of the fines the culprit becomes insolvent.

The PS group recalled that the adoption of the project will bring Belgian law in line with European and international legislation and insisted on the key concerns regarding human trafficking and the exploitation of vulnerable persons that the project faces.

In conclusion, all bills 1559 and 1560, as amended, were approved unanimously.

I would like to respond to the report. I would like to congratulate Mr. Perpète for stating explicitly in the report that “les partis démocratiques” support the bill. We are pleased that the PS finally counts the Flemish Interest as the "partis democratiques". I hope his party is consistent now and will continue to do so in the future.

I suspect that this was a comment in the context of the general discussion.

The speakers registered in the general debate are the ladies Lanjri, Marghem and Claes.

The present bill deals with the whole of human trafficking. In my speech, I will limit myself to the section on domestic dairy because the bill I have submitted together with Mr. Van Parys and Mr. Verherstraeten deals with this subject.

House milk production is a well-known problem that we find mainly in large cities but not only there. Many mayors of smaller cities are also facing the problem. More and more often, apartments and residential buildings — if one can even call them residential buildings — are rented in very poor condition. Apartments or studios intended for one person are rented to several persons. Sometimes it happens that they are rented in shifts of eight hours. In short, a practice that can be accused.

Often these are houses that do not meet the minimum standards of housing quality which causes residents to live in unhuman conditions. After all, all houses, both rental and ownership houses, must meet a number of minimum standards on housing quality and reliability. In the Flemish Region, the Chamber Decree and the Housing Code reflect this. In practice, however, we find that certain houses have many shortcomings, especially in terms of safety. There is a danger of electrocution, fire hazard, defects such as the possibility of CO 2 poisoning and a lot of defects related to comfort such as lack of heating.

These properties are very often rented to people who are in an economically and socially weak position and are forced to fall into the worst segment of the rental market. The overwhelming majority of the victims — which has already been seen in the past — are often foreigners. Often in practice it is about asylum seekers who have already had difficulty in the housing market anyway and because of their origin have a double difficulty.

However, it is very clear that it is not just about foreigners. This is evidenced by figures from the Flemish Housing Inspection. This shows that in 2003 65% of the victims were foreigners, 6% were of unknown nationality and 15% were Belgians. Last year the figures increased. This means that the share of Belgians has risen to 19%. The annual reports show that some house milkers rent a property, while other owners rent different properties. On average, a housekeeper rents 4 pants. A rental house milkmaker was good for 37 properties

A new fact that has emerged in recent years is the growing number of criminal organizations renting houses that are not in order at all under the guise of companies.

Until now, the main law on which one could rely to address this problem was the Foreign Relations Act. I have already pointed out that more and more victims are Belgians. Therefore, it was necessary to be able to protect the Belgians from this phenomenon. In addition, it was generally better to remove this problem from the Foreigners Act and to include it in the Criminal Code so that the problems can be addressed appropriately.

That is why, together with my colleagues Tony Van Parys and Servais Verherstraeten, I have submitted a bill that indeed seeks equality with respect to the victims. It should not be related to nationality. Whether they are Belgians or foreigners, they can all become victims and they must therefore all have the same right to protection. The latter must be placed equally for everyone.

Some time after the submission of our bill, therefore, came the government’s bill on human trafficking. Part of it, namely from Article 6, also concerns domestic dairy. Both the government draft and our bill intended the same thing, namely the approach to domestic dairy, to include this matter in the Criminal Code and to give a strong signal in terms of punishment.

However, there are some small differences between our bill and the government’s bill, for example in relation to the penalty. We adopted the penalty measure from the Foreigners Act, which is somewhat stricter. The government’s draft is more flexible, in the sense that the penalty is set from six months to one year for a common case of house milk farming. However, this is compensated by the multiplication by the number of victims. That is why we were able to find ourselves in it, also in terms of the penalty.

In addition to the prison sentence, there are fines from 500 euros to 25,000 euros. The fines are based on the fact that the perpetrator rents more homes that do not actually meet the minimum quality standards, at an abnormally high price, and also when this happens in the context of organized crime.

Another penalty provision in the draft is that house milkers can be deterred from their civil rights. You can also impose on the house milkers that they must repair the home at their own expense.

What is not mentioned in the bill, although it is a problem that is frequent and with which mayors are faced especially from the big cities, are the shaking conditions in which families threaten to come out on the streets. The mayor must resettle the victims. There the shoe wreaks, because in the legislation was not stipulated that that resettlement could take place at the expense of the owner, i.e. of the house milkmaker. For this reason, Mr Van Parys and I have submitted an amendment so that victims can be resettled at the expense of the house milkmaker. That, I think, is at least a step forward. Our amendment was unanimously accepted and we are pleased. No member of any political group agreed with us on this point. That is important.

I would like to make a comment that I also made in the committee meeting, in particular on amendments that have been discussed at the request of the MR and CDH. They found that the provisions relating to the definition, the definition of the concept of “victim”, were too vague. They wanted to link a number of terms and conditions.

The condition that has been inscribed in the text is, and I read for: "...that the victim had no choice but to be abused." How can one as a victim prove that one had no other choice? What if, indeed, a little further in the same street, there was also an apartment to rent? Is this proof that there was another choice, or something else? In any case, I hope that when this bill is applied in practice, the judges will judge with common sense and will not make it more difficult for the victims than they already have. I hope they won’t be too heavy on it. Their

More generally, I would like to say that we in the committee have approved both Article 6 and the whole draft on human trafficking and will do so today, because it really addresses a problem that arises in society. It is also fully in line with the bill I have submitted with Mr. Tony Van Parys and Mr. Servais Verherstraeten. We will approve the whole.

Mr. President, Dear friends

- to introduce in the Criminal Code the concept of exploitation of begging and the aggravating circumstances applicable to it; - to introduce provisions defining the concept of trafficking in human beings and the aggravating circumstances applicable to it; - to adapt the definition of the concept of trafficking in human beings to the definition contained in the Directive of 28 November 2002 which specifies the aid for illegal entry, transit and illegal stay as well as the definition of aggravating circumstances applicable to it.

This bill also aims to introduce in the Criminal Code provisions defining the notion of abuse of the vulnerability of others by selling, renting or making available real estate in order to ⁇ an abnormal profit. This is the point on which the discussions in the committee have mainly focused, as our colleague Perpète, rapporteur for this project, recalled.

In a modern democratic society, it is obviously unacceptable for malicious owners to rent, in knowledge of the facts, houses at exorbitant prices, thus taking advantage of the distress experienced by certain people. One question that arose was whether this goal was not already met by regional standards, such as regional housing codes. For example, with regard to Brussels, the Ordinance of 17 July 2003 enshrines the right to decent housing and contains a series of safety, sanitation and equipment standards that are guaranteed by a whole arsenal of more or less compelling measures. Control investigations may be carried out, following complaints from a tenant, by a regional inspection service which may also diligently conduct initiative investigations.

This order of the Brussels Region constitutes the Brussels Housing Code and also provides for sanctions, and this is where things are more interesting: - an order of the landlord to regularise the situation; - a ban on renting or making the property occupy, which is already very compelling, - and finally, an administrative fine of 3,000 to 25,000 euros, this amount can be doubled if there is a recurrence within two years.

The housing codes and the project arrangement pursue the same objective, namely to fight against intentional bad owners who intend to lease a property that does not meet the minimum standards defined by the Regions.

For additional information, there are also federal standards that deal with housing compliance. Article 2 of Section 2 of Chapter 2 of Title VIII of Book III of the Civil Code prescribes that the rented property must meet the basic requirements of safety, sanitation and habitability. The Royal Decree of 8 July establishes the minimum conditions to be met for an immovable property leased as a main residence to comply with the basic requirements of safety, health and habitability. If these conditions are not met, the leasee may require the execution of the works necessary to bring the leased property into conformity, he may request the termination of the contract with damages and while waiting for the execution of the works, the judge may grant a reduction in the rent.

Furthermore, it was appropriate to ensure that the legal provision in project and in discussion complies with the provisions of Article 12 of the Constitution and Article 7 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, according to which provisions containing criminal incriminations must have a character of precision and predictability. This was, in fact, dear colleagues, the second hassle that the MR saw to this project in discussion: the lack of accuracy of the criminal incrimination, in addition to the fact that other sanctions existed on the regional level.

Other issues were also raised in the discussion. What should be understood by “precary social situation of the buyer”? What should be understood by “intention to ⁇ an abnormal profit”? How can the landlord be sure of the number of people who occupy the rented property? What are the properties targeted? Are these only housing or all buildings or parts of housing or unusual housing such as containers, basements, stalls or other? The MR group actively and constructively participated in the debate, submitting a series of amendments to clarify the scope of the text and to specify the proposed incrimination in the most precise way. It was important in our opinion to clarify the scope of the text in order to prevent good-faith owners from being covered by this provision. It is possible that the tenant finds himself in a precarious social situation, in lease and for reasons related to the evolution of his existence, without the owner being necessarily informed. What to do in this case? It may also be that the precarious social situation is not apparent when making the housing available.

The MR group therefore proposed to clarify that the contested housing is that which is made available under conditions incompatible with human dignity. The notion of condition incompatible with human dignity is reflected in Article 23 of the Constitution – a standard superior to the law – which specifies that everyone has the right to lead a life consistent with human dignity, including the right to decent housing.

The project under consideration uses this notion in article 433quinquies §1, 3° as proposed. The purpose of our amendment was also, in the field of federal sanction, since it is indeed a federal sanction, to use a concept that is general and that does not refer only to insalubrity, of different application according to regional legislation depending on the said legislation. The aim was therefore to choose a global characterization that is not modulable according to these legislations, so that the infringement is not applied differently depending on the Region in which you are located.

These clarifications constitute, for us, the minimum minimorum, given that whenever one decides to institute or create a criminal sanction, one must always think that the persons who will be subjected to it will have to resist the coercion of public force and that it is necessary, in a democratic society, that the criminal incrimination be as precise as possible to avoid the abuse of this coercion and the judicial error. As a result of what I said, the MR group will support the text that is submitted today to your vote. Thank you for your attention, dear colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, Colleagues, I would like to begin with a word of thanks and congratulations to the reporter, Mr. Perpète, who gave a clear and comprehensive report on this subject, both in terms of the content of the draft laws and legislative proposals presented, as well as in terms of the difficulties, the discussion points we had during the hearing in the Committee on Justice, which for me today obviously makes the work somewhat easier.

Colleagues, I think I find an open door when I say that the current bills and bills contain a number of important improvements. Let me briefly highlight which points are very important for the SP.A. To keep it somewhat clear, I propose to combine them, on the one hand regarding the bill on human trafficking and human trafficking and on the other, on supplementing the criminal protection of minors.

First, I will discuss the draft law on human trafficking and human trafficking. Also during the report it has already been shown that it is essential because thanks to the draft a number of international and European provisions and instruments will be translated into Belgian law. On the international level, there were indeed already the Additional Protocols to the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime concerning the prevention, control and punishment of trafficking in human beings and more ⁇ of trafficking in women and children, and against the smuggling of migrants on land, by sea and in the air. At the European level, two instruments existed, on the one hand, the Framework Decision of the Council of the European Union of 19 July 2002 on combating human trafficking, and on the other hand, the Council Directive of 28 November 2002 on the definition of assistance in the case of illegal entry, illegal transit and illegal stay.

These European and international instruments are now finally translated into Belgian law.

In addition, and ⁇ more importantly, there are a number of positive elements. A first positive element in the draft on human trafficking and human trafficking is for sp.a that thanks to the draft, the criminalization of human trafficking and human trafficking in the future will no longer be limited to the international level but also to the national level and consequently will no longer affect only foreigners but also Belgians.

As regards the criminalization, the scope of the application is also extended to the various forms, on the one hand to sexual exploitation such as prostitution, pornography, fornication and on the other hand to the economic exploitation of for example labour, the exploitation of begging, as well as organ removal.

A second important positive element in this design for us is that the design provides a number of additional aggravating conditions. I think of the fact that one is part of a criminal organization, but also putting the life of a victim at risk.

A third important positive element for us is the aggravation of penalties for persons engaged in the smuggling of unaccompanied minors. This is achieved by extending the scope of aggravating circumstances to all minors. This is an important achievement and progress.

A last important positive element for the sp.a in the draft on human trafficking and human trafficking is the approach of the cottage dairy. Mrs Lanjri has already talked extensively about this. I think we all agree that this is a contemptible use. It really is about abusing one’s weakness or vulnerability by making available, renting or selling property with one clear goal, namely obtaining an abnormal profit.

I really think this practice is absolutely disgusting, and for several reasons. These are often houses that are in a miserable state. They do not meet the necessary quality standards which expose the persons who rent these houses to many dangers. I think of the danger of fire or a CO 2 poisoning. These are inhuman living conditions. These are, for us, the positive elements of the draft on human trafficking and human trafficking.

Then I come to the second draft that is presented today, namely the supplementation of the criminal protection of minors that I care about.

That is why we have submitted our own bill on this subject. We can really say that this is a design that is absolutely essential. It is essential because it constitutes a necessary reform of the criminal part of the 1965 Youth Protection Act. The draft law is first and foremost correctly aimed at the adaptation of the Criminal Code in order to strengthen the punishment of persons who use minors to commit criminal offences. Their

I just said that this part is an essential part for the sp.a, for the simple reason that for us the legal protection of the minor is really essential. I must admit that the Act of 28 November 2000 on the criminal protection of minors was already a progress in that sense, in that sense it was indeed important. For us, however, there was one big but connected, namely the fact that there was nothing regulated about the use or abuse of the minor. That constituted a very important deficiency, a significant gap, especially since many studies today demonstrate that precisely that form of crime is on the rise today. She is on the rise for many reasons. Their

According to the Belgian system, the minor is criminally irresponsible. Do not misunderstand me, I personally think this is a positive thing. A minor is and remains a minor and should be treated in that sense. I am convinced that every effort must be made to keep these young people out of the criminal sphere for as long as possible. Their

On the other hand, we observe that this form of crime really makes a boost by adults having a relationship of trust with minors, having an authority bond on minors, having a power position that they can abuse to then go forcing those minors to, I say something, commit forced robbery, to threaten third parties or even to commit forced theft. Their

We can say globally that this is a form of crime that is so contemptible that it must be addressed and clearly punished by criminal law.

As a group, we have come up with our own bill. Minister Onkelinx himself came up with our draft law that itself addresses this problem. As a group, we are happy with this. As a group, we fully supported this during the hearing and voting in the committee. Colleagues, we will do so today at the voting of both drafts in this plenary session. thank you .