Proposition 53K2986

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 21 mars 2007 réglant l'installation et l'utilisation de caméras de surveillance.

General information ¶

Submitted by

The Senate

Submission date

June 20, 2013

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

police checks vehicle registration road safety video surveillance

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR 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 ¶

March 27, 2014 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

by Mr. Laurent Devin, rapporteur, refers to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Minister, dear colleagues, the draft amendment to the law of 21 March 2007 can count on our approval. It regulates the use of mobile number plate recognition cameras, which are a useful tool for the police services.

However, we must admit that we expected something more. The Minister of Internal Affairs made another announcement that he could not fulfill. She would come to Parliament with a draft with a comprehensive regulation. After months of waiting, it finally turned out that the bill did not come. There was again disagreement in the government, and not for the first time. That was also the reason why the committee had to meet this afternoon. For example, the government could not reach agreement on the supplementary distribution key with the fire department. The government is transferring this issue to the governors.

With regard to the design of the cameras, several hearings were held. However, the problems raised by the various speakers there are not resolved by the present draft. For example, the head of the corps of Mechelen indicated that the federal police violates legal provisions when they use, for example, cameras mounted on a helicopter.

Also, the design does not provide a solution for technologies that will be possible in the future. We are only talking about the number plate recognition. However, there are also other ways to compare certain data with a database. When we need legislative changes for every new technology, we are always behind.

There is also no regulation for so-called bodyscans or for the use of drones. There is also no legal regulation for the recording of sound.

All these issues should have been addressed in the draft announced by the Minister of Interior. Again, the government fails to come up with a comprehensive solution for an important issue.

However, the N-VA wants to be constructive. For now, we can live with the proposed solution. However, we are already sure that there is work on the shelf for the next government.

The present draft finally provides a legal basis for the use of ANPR cameras. Nowadays, many police zones use a mobile camera, built into a car. If the images are disputed, then a problem arises. The current bill removes that gap in the legislation.

However, that is the sad fate of the 2007 law: that legislation needs constant adjustment. With the legislation on the use of cameras, we are actually behind the facts, because at the moment it is not technology-neutral. Whenever there is a new technological development regarding camera systems, we need to change the law.

For the future, we must ask ourselves questions about this method. Therefore, I repeat the vision of CD&V regarding the use of cameras by the police services. The camera law is not the right tool. We should formulate the law on the police office in such a way that the technological evolution of cameras is integrated into it. That trail of thought seems to us acceptable and a good solution, because recently a legal framework for the information processing by the police services was also approved, with the law on the ANG, the general national database.

In the debate with the various parties, of course, the right to privacy and also the impact of the action of the police services always comes to the fore. Especially with regard to the latter aspect, the trade unions are quite reluctant. However, we think that the police officers on the ground themselves are less reluctant and are asking party to use such technologies. Today, for example, we are already confronted with the Google Glass system, and it is a reality that our legislation today is not prepared against it.

We will support the current bill. After all, it is a step forward for us, because the adjustment creates a legal basis for what is already happening on the ground. The images taken by the mobile cameras of the police services can be effectively used thanks to the current legislation.

We intend to ⁇ conduct a thorough discussion at the beginning of the next parliamentary term on an adaptation of the camera law, with or without the integration of the new camera systems in the law on the police office.

In the 21st century, we all know that public authorities must adapt to technological advances that evolve almost every day. This also applies to law enforcement forces that must fight against criminals who are getting better organized and also have increasingly sophisticated technological resources.

Among the technological arsenal useful to our police officers, surveillance cameras constitute a device of protection of citizens enabling the prevention of certain crimes, as well as the search for perpetrators of crimes and crimes. In addition, I find that many are the mayors, whether they are reformers, humanists or socialists, who place cameras in their communes. This is proof that these tools are not gadgets and that they play an important role in security policies.

The MR thus believes that users of new security technologies should be protected by a clear and unambiguous legal basis. Today, we are invited to comment on this text of law that provides an explicit legal framework for the use of cameras allowing automatic recognition of registration plates, i.e. ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) cameras.

For the MR, we must give our police officers the means to act with equal weapons with criminals while ensuring legal security for them. This is what the project seeks to do: we can only support it.

Furthermore, the government-presented project offers all the guarantees in respect of privacy: the legal framework for cameras. This is a step forward that will be taken today.

Unfortunately, we believe that this proposal would have benefited by being integrated into a more comprehensive legislative approach, setting the framework for all the steps that still need to be taken with regard to surveillance cameras. I think in particular of the use of drones: it still needs to be specified from a legal point of view as more and more police and even rescue areas are considering investing in this type of equipment.

We know that the minister joined our approach, but that she had to deal with the ideological stubbornness of certain political groups. Dear colleagues, know that strengthening our camera legislation will be one of our priorities for the next legislature. The next Minister of the Interior will be able to count on the support of our group in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the parliamentarians who support this bill.

As I have already said in the committee, this is an indispensable first step but it will take another second – if we can still act in this legislature, although it becomes hazardous to engage in it – to go further in regulating the problem of drones and bodys-cams on police uniforms.