Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 16 janvier 2013 portant diverses mesures relatives à la lutte contre la piraterie maritime.
General information ¶
- Submitted by
- MR Swedish coalition
- Submission date
- June 23, 2015
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- legal process navy piracy criminal procedure maritime transport
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- CD&V LE DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PP VB
- Voted to reject
- PS | SP PVDA | PTB
- Abstained from voting
- Groen Vooruit 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.
Discussion ¶
July 15, 2015 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
President Siegfried Bracke ⚙
Mr Thiébaut refers to his written report
Alain Top Vooruit ⚙
My comment will be as brief as my comment on the matter.
It is clear that the safety of ships flying the Belgian flag must be ensured. Pirates often attack ships with heavy weapons or take them hostage. This must of course be avoided. This is a threat in many areas.
Therefore, my group supports the contents of this bill. There is also one but connected. There is something to note about the way of working. The deadline for the draft law was 28 June 2015 and an enforcement decision extended the waiver by six months. The government was aware of the deadline and the issue. However, it still took five months for a bill to be submitted to the State Council for advice. As a result, this draft was submitted only five days before the final deadline.
We do not object to the retroactive effect of this bill. At the moment, that’s the best of the bad solutions. But the retroactivity does not prevent legal uncertainty, which the government could have perfectly avoided.
In addition, evaluation is very important. Our group submits an annual review to the Council of Ministers and to Parliament. This may be important for Mr Vuye and his group, as he referred to a democratic rule of law. We have submitted an amendment to get an annual review by Parliament and Government.
Efficiency is of great importance in this measure and a five-year review, as currently provided in the draft, is far too little to guarantee it. Where necessary, measures need to be updated, which is why we have submitted that amendment.