Proposition 53K3527

Projet de loi relatif à l'internement de personnes.

General information ¶

Submitted by

The Senate

Submission date

Feb. 21, 2013

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

prisoner psychiatric institution carrying out of sentence

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

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

Abstained from voting

VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Bernard Clerfayt (MR) abstained from voting.
• Fouad Lahssaini (Ecolo) abstained from voting.
• Olivier Maingain (MR) abstained from voting.

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 ¶

April 22, 2014 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

by Mr. Lahssaini, the rapporteur, refers to his written report.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, a number of actors are concerned about one aspect of the text relating to internment. In fact, it appears that certain costs of internment could be borne by the persons concerned. Could you, Mr. Minister, clarify the labels on this subject? Indeed, some actors fear that it is decided to intern some people so that others can take care of them. It is therefore important to make clarifications on this subject.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleague, in fact, this is an article that was taken from an old law; that is why it appears in the bill under consideration. This is not a new fact. The people who developed the new text were based on existing texts by adapting them.

I read all the articles in the press. I can understand that they raise questions or discussions. This is, in fact, an article of the Act of 1964. There is no question of bringing a more or a less.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker. But it also appears that, in practice, the cost of the care of interned persons is covered by the SPF Justice, while the text under review says the opposite. It is quite surprising! The text that already existed has been taken back into the new text, although it is known that it is contrary to practice. In fact, in reality, it is the SPF Justice who intervenes.

It might be necessary that one day, as the entry into force of the law is planned for 2016, the law should be adapted so that it is in accordance with practice or jurisprudence.

Mr. Speaker, it should be noted that this article has been passed to the Senate because it was included in the old text and is not applied.

In my opinion, Mr. Brotcorne is quite right to say that a bill will need to be submitted in order to adapt this article and have a debate on the subject.

That being said, this text on the internment, as well as the ongoing opening of the CPL of Ghent and the ongoing construction of the CPL of Antwerp, testify to how little we are doing during this legislature to adapt and improve the situation of the interned in our prisons, which was necessary in our country.

It is important to note that there is no intention of making more people participate in the expenses of internment. It would be important to meet a number of actors to mean it to them, because it would be appropriate to reassure them. We are aware that on the question of internment, this text is only a small step from all the difficulties that people still experience in the structures. I hope we can further improve our management. This will be an opportunity to clear up the text of this past rubbish.