Proposition 54K1644

Projet de loi portant des dispositions diverses - Intérieur - Police intégrée.

General information ¶

Submitted by

MR Swedish coalition

Submission date

Feb. 9, 2016

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

recruitment administrative structures extremism municipal police criminal investigation department police judicial proceedings criminal procedure terrorism

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR VB

Voted to reject

PS | SP PVDA | PTB

Abstained from voting

Groen Vooruit Ecolo LE DéFI PP

Party dissidents ¶

• 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 ¶

March 3, 2016 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr Franky Demon, rapporteur, refers to his written report.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Ministers, dear colleagues, we vote at the end of the day on the bill containing various provisions Internal and Integrated Police. Generally speaking, the MR group fully adheres to the bill as it aims to meet police operational needs: administrative measures to facilitate the performance of judicial tasks, a more sophisticated recruitment process, the granting of the competence of a judicial police officer auxiliary to the King’s Attorney to certain police inspectors. These are noticeable and expected advances within the police corps. Stimulating the operational capacity in the judicial field and increasing the flexibility in the employment of staff are objectives that our group supports.

The project also aims to improve and clarify certain shadow areas. As an example, and as I mentioned during committee debates, the law on the police function is finally adapted to allow police services to check the identity of a person who has committed a fact punishable by an administrative sanction. There was a legal gap in this area. It was also paradoxical since, unlike the police officers, the peacekeepers had, in turn, a legal authorization to carry out these identity checks.

I would also like to emphasize the importance of working with the trade unions. Some elements of concertation are found in the project, and this is primary in the eyes of the MR group.

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, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this draft provides for a number of provisions to align the police reality with a number of changes that had become necessary and also to make simplifications here and there.

I will give a few examples of those simplifications.

Provisions on military courts that were no longer relevant to the police were amended.

There are also a number of provisions on the test bench, where certain ammunition must now no longer be offered.

Of course, a number of provisions also introduce adjustments to the Staff Regulations. In that context, I am talking about a solution for CALog staff members who were recruited under the subsidised contractual employment, a statute that now no longer exists. However, there is a solution to this, in order to be able to keep those involved in employment.

There will also be an additional check for recruitment of CALog staff, which is ⁇ not an unnecessary luxury in times of terror. We know who we are hiring.

There are also some technical adjustments for the merger of the CICs and the AICs, which are now referred to as SICAs according to the judicial districts. Some things had to be adjusted in this area as well.

There will also be a solution for pensions, with a technical adjustment to the Pension Fund.

The law on the police office is also adapted to the current threat of terrorism.

It is important that adjustments ensure that the Security of the State is no longer burdened with tasks of administrative police, but rather becomes a pure intelligence and security service.

It also provides for an administrative responsible for the maritime police in West Flanders, namely the governor.

As Mr Pivin has cited, there is also an adjustment for, among other things, collective training, so that the police can act immediately in very urgent cases.

We also welcome a number of measures to better protect police officers and help them better identify. I am not talking about fingerprints. This is about something else.

An important adjustment is also a change in the legal aid. So far, everyone could get some kind of legal aid. However, if proceedings are taken against the own employer, this would no longer be possible. This is also unlogical. If two employees proceed against each other, legal aid would also be eliminated, as this would undermine the principle of neutrality and the impartiality of the employer.

Finally, we are pleased – it was my own proposal – that the proposal on the mergers and dismemberments of police zones was included in the draft. Municipalities can therefore voluntarily leave their police zone, of course on the condition that they join a new police zone within the same judicial district. In order to regulate the transfer of personnel, equipment and goods in a judgmental manner, a number of technical provisions were also included.

We are positively opposed to the present draft law, which corresponds to the current social reality. We will therefore support it.

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, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker. I say it from the beginning because the role of the opposition is not to criticize to criticize.

I see that you are announcing an agreement for the transfer of personality protection officers, so far grouped within the State Security, to the integrated police. You also confirm that this Agreement will enter into force on 1 April. This is a reason for satisfaction.

Other elements arouse more mixed feelings. I will raise two. The first is the issue of intervention numbers. Police officers are required in certain circumstances to replace their identification plaque with such a number. We welcome that the proposed measure aims to simplify the process in case of a problem. I recall that my group has always been concerned about the protection of the privacy of police officers and the possibility of a democratic citizen control over how tasks are performed. However, Mr. Minister, we remain unclear as to the guarantees that this number is clearly readable in various places of the uniform of the intervening officers. There is no doubt that you will improve the proposal and its implementation.

In another register, there are provisions on the screening of candidates in police functions. Indeed, the importance of such measures is well understood, and more specifically in the current context of fighting terrorism. But one can ask if the measure does not go a little too far. Can a candidate be denied admission for facts for which he is not responsible? Having a brother or cousin who makes a mistake, is it an element playing against a candidate, while his own behavior is irreproachable?

We ask you to be extremely vigilant, but in both directions, to the procedure that must therefore be subject to serious control.

Finally, there are measures that do not suit us or that seem frankly exaggerated to us. This is the case with your decision to postpone the date to which the BNG will need to be adjusted and to incorporate new data on judicial follow-up. This is an important tool, even essential, for proper police work. And you reject the improvement because the austerity imposed on the services does not allow them to fulfill this task. This shows the limits of your policy in relation to the government’s fiscal policy.

This is also the case with the provision that exempts local police from informing their political authority before dispersing a rally deemed threatening. We had a discussion on this in the committee. I wasn’t convinced, and I told you, but we’ll see what you can answer in the plenary session.

It should not be forgotten, and you remember, you know the function of the mayor as a person, that it is indeed the mayors who are responsible for the operations of the local police. Does the minor or presented correction as such, which we are discussing, not risk empowering the local police over the mayor’s authority under certain circumstances? We disagree with this interpretation.

We also have some concerns about measures that may seem community-like – I dare the word. Maybe you’re going to mislead me. I also spoke in the committee about the decision to remove the Liège Test Bank from the task of testing the ammunition of police weapons. I have submitted comments concerning the ministry to which this test bank depends.

This after your fellow Justice has, on the other hand, decided to turn away from the DNA analysis center of our city to prefer a German operator.

We have the same concerns and the same analysis with regard to the provision concerning the reconfiguration of the police zones in the Brussels-Capital region, which will actually increase the number of Dutch-speaking district counselors.

Mr. Demeyer, in the committee, you have indeed made a comment and called for a sort of authority incident. You said that the trial bank falls under the competence of the Minister of Economy. That is true, but not only under the competence of the Minister of Economy, but also of the Minister of Justice. However, I do not see the relevance of this for the treatment of the present draft. After all, whether it is the Department of Economy, Justice or any other department, the draft has been discussed by the government. So I don’t see the relevance of your comment, or it should be that you know something we don’t know.

I do not have much illusions about taking into account the remarks I made in committee, especially on the basis of the experience I gained under the former government. At the time, the Minister of Economy had presented a number of proposals. But my duty is to recall in plenary session what I said in committee.

The Liège Arms Testing Bank has a recognized capacity and know-how in this area. In the commission, I explained the link that exists between weapons testing and ammunition testing. I was, however, for fifteen years, at the head of the Bank of Tests of Arms. I explained how it could be dangerous for police forces and for civilians using the weapons and ammunition tested there. I said it in the committee. I repeat this in the plenary session.

The majority takes responsibility. I’ll make an appointment in a while to analyze the situation.

In the end, you are right. Whether it’s at the level of Economy, Interior, Justice or any other department, what matters is the result. On this point, I can agree with you. On the other hand, my group does not agree. We will see what happens in terms of security and development at the level of other services.

There are four amendments. Please be aware, Mr. Minister, that we will approve the overall text only if our amendments are voted.

For the rest, I disagree with the text that stipulates that the seat of the judicial police can leave the center of the district. Why Why ? Because the center of the district is the city centre and it is important to have a judicial presence where there is the most population.

I know the debate on this subject. It was under the former government, but also under this government. Your text provides that the seat of the Judicial Police may be located anywhere in the district.

This may facilitate mobility, I admit, but I consider it to be a bad policy for police presence.

I have finished it. We will be careful after the debate.

This proposal of legislation with several provisions can provide a quick solution to a number of problems. Thus, our group is satisfied with the measures taken around the establishment of police zones. The text clearly states that a possible merger of the Brussels police zones is also being considered. We are happy that this is being made possible. In fact, this proposal means that nothing prevents the processing of our proposal to merge the six Brussels police zones into the Interim Committee on Counter-Terrorism.

What concerns us, however, is the proposed regulation surrounding the investigation of the blameless behavior of candidates in recruitment, set out in Article 63 of this bill. It is understandable that, in times of radicalization, some attention has been paid to potential links with or infiltration from criminal or extremist environments. It is important to obtain all possible information about this from the State Security Department or the OCAD. At the same time, caution is required if one also wishes to take into account merely clues, without having to do with criminal offences or convictions. It follows, among other things, that the rules in this regard need to be formulated very precisely. After all, in the past, critical comments have already been made about making lists of potentially dangerous persons.

I also have a comment on Article 74. That article refers to the decision of some insurance companies to exclude persons participating in foreign service contracts from the coverage of their life insurance. In this article, the government takes on the consequences of this attitude. We think it is very logical to point out to the insurance companies their responsibilities first. Government should first make efforts to stop such abuses.

Finally, I would like to point out Article 84 — in the original draft law it was Article 83 — which provides for an extension of certain implementation deadlines. To invoke the argument of savings in order to postpone these deadlines seems to me unrelevant, especially since the government itself has decided on the savings. This is an example of policy that is weakened under pressure from government savings.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I thank you for your contribution.

I think that all the points mentioned here have been discussed extensively in the committee. I would therefore refer to the committee report.

A number of points have been cited, which I said we will ⁇ take into account in the implementation of the law. This is the case, inter alia, for the point that Mr Top cited in relation to the insurance companies. Mr. Top, I think you are rightly pointing out a risk that we are taking. Talks with insurance companies will be conducted.

Mr. Demeyer, due to the lack of time, I cannot address your comments.

I therefore refer to the report of the committee in my responses to the various comments.