Projet de loi modifiant l'article 12bis de la loi du 15 décembre 1980 sur l'accès au territoire, le séjour, l'établissement et l'éloignement des étrangers.
General information ¶
- Submitted by
-
The Senate
- Submission date
- July 12, 2007
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- foreign national civil status family migration residence permit
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld MR
- Voted to reject
- N-VA LDD FN VB
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.
Discussion ¶
Feb. 5, 2009 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
Rapporteur Leen Dierick ⚙
Mr. Speaker, the present draft was transmitted to us by the Senate and arose from concerns about the situation of foreigners who cannot present official documents showing their parenthood or affinity in the context of family reunification. The Minister pointed out in her presentation that the proposed legislative amendment should balance between, on the one hand, the rights of the foreigner and, on the other hand, the mitigation of possible abuses that can lead to situations of human trafficking and child trafficking.
A solution was found by the amendment of Article 12bis of the Act of 15 December 1980 on the entry into the territory, residence, establishment and removal of foreigners, which deals with the evidence to be presented.
The preferential regime, which has so far been applicable only to refugees, will be extended to include family reunification with a foreigner who is not a refugee, insofar as he can demonstrate that he is unable to prove his relationship with the foreigner who resides here by official documents.
The design provides for a cascade system. For example, the foreigner can present other valid documents if he is not able to present official documents. A circulation letter will later indicate what exactly is meant by “other valid documents”, this to increase legal certainty.
The line will also be extended to the family reunification in respect of a Belgian or EU citizen, by amending the similar article 44 of the Royal Decree of 8 October 1981. Through the organization of a transparent system in Article 12bis of the Act of 15 December 1980, this bill is intended to help eliminate the situation of impossibility to present official documents.
Mr Cornil expressed, on behalf of his group, his satisfaction with the possibilities offered by the draft for foreigners who, due to circumstances, cannot demonstrate their blood or affinity with the family reunifier. However, he regrets that the possibility of using the act of awareness, as provided in the annexed bill, is not withheld. The Minister points out the possibilities of abuse that may arise from the act of awareness and states that in practice the DNA test provides the most conclusive evidence in the context of the family reunification procedure.
Mr De Man opposes any further expansion of the possibilities for family reunification. In many cases, according to the speaker, it is a case of family formation. In addition, according to Mr. De Man, other documents are already being used today to prove the family ties and he informs the minister about this.
The Minister points out the documents that are already accepted for this purpose in the existing procedure for recognised refugees. These will be included in the already mentioned circulation letter. This is a non-exhaustive list.
Mr Collard is satisfied with the proposed amendments and also rejects the use of the act of awareness. The chances of abuse would then be too high. He sees more certainty in the application of DNA research. On the other hand, Mr. Collard points out the high cost of such DNA testing. He therefore proposes, on behalf of his group, to make the DNA testing in these files free of charge. The Minister acknowledges the problem of the high cost and leaves investigations in order to obtain the necessary resources for this in the next budget control.
The draft was eventually adopted with 10 votes against 1.
Filip De Man VB ⚙
Mr. Speaker, colleagues, the draft law amending Article 12bis of the Foreigners Act concerns the application for a residence permit for an unlimited duration, and that for the purpose of family reunification.
This includes the evidence that must be submitted in the matter. One must prove the bond with whom one wants to be reunited.
First and foremost this, colleagues, that so-called family reunification is currently the main immigration channel. In the vast majority of cases, it is not family reunification, but family formation, because – the phenomenon is known – the vast majority of foreigners residing here will consciously seek a partner in the country of origin.
Today, it is proposed to extend the preferential regime, which now only applies to family members of recognised refugees, to foreigners who are not refugees. As the rapporteur said, there is a cascade system. The foreigner who can prove that he is in the impossibility by means of official documents – meaning: legalized acts of civil status, such as birth and marriage acts – to prove the blood bond or relative relationship invoked, may replace it with other valid evidence. With regard to these other valid evidence, we raise great questions.
As previously stated, a circular letter will determine what should be understood by “other valid evidence.” From the report it can be inferred that these are birth certificates, birth certificates, birth certificates, marriage acts, notarial acts, national identity cards that indicate the descent relationship, marriage contracts, extracts from birth registers, substitute judgments, and so on.
As stated in the committee, the Flemish Belang is convinced that through the legislative change the abuses of the so-called family reunification system will increase even more than before. The verification by the competent service of the authenticity of the submitted evidence will be significantly complicated by the extension of the preferential regime, which now applies to recognised refugees and thus is extended to the family members of all foreigners.
The likelihood of fraud is increasing, in particular given the fact that corruption in the countries of origin is often blatant.
How will your services in the name of God be able to verify that a notarial act does not indicate a false relationship? How will your services be able to verify, for example, whether a marriage certificate was not forged and obtained by corruption?
The likelihood of fraud is therefore increasing, but the Open Vld has no problem with this. Once again it is proven that Open Vld stands for open borders.
Mr Schiltz, that is absolutely true. Several people – not just members of the Flemish Interest – have clearly pointed out that the risk of fraud is quite high. The above-mentioned risk will now increase. There is apparently not enough fraud in terms of regularizations and naturalizations yet. There will now also be even better and more than ever possible fraud in the area of residence permits for the so-called family reunificators.
Colleagues, more generally, I would like to point out once again that only one party is awake to the question of how many non-European foreigners Belgium can still admit, before irreversible damage to society is inflicted. I am speaking not only about our crumbling social security and the rising crime, but also about the Islamization of our cities, about the disappearance of social cohesion, about the value pattern developed by our ancestors, and about the foundations of our civilization itself, which are threatened to be destroyed by an ever-growing group of immigrants, exhausting our culture.
Mrs. Minister, the green and red supporters of an open-door policy call you a tough aunt. The opposite is actually true. As a result of the upcoming legislative amendment, which you are 100 percent behind, the immigration snowball will increase again, as will your mass regularizations and your plea for new host workers, by the way.
The Flemish Interest is the only party that wants to end the unstoppable and massive influx of non-integrable foreigners. Today, no one wants to listen to the other party. However, I am confident: someday the slinger will return and the voter will give us the right.