The building of the Council for the Judiciary in The Hague. Photo ANP / Lex van Lieshout
The Council for the Judiciary is critical of a bill that calls anti-terrorist actions in life. The proposal is “unclear” and some intentions are “highly undesirable”, as can be read in the opinion of the judges in the Netherlands today to send Ard van der Steur Minister of Security and Justice (VVD).
The bill is intended to take preventive measures to protect national security and prevent people from participating or providing support to terrorist organizations. However, the Council considers that these preventive measures in some cases a “punitive character” can get.
More than restraint
The measures apply discussed in the bill as limiting freedom. Contact, travel, and exclusion orders and an obligation to report or the revocation of licenses, subsidies, exemptions and approvals are possible. It is according to the judges unclear whether it also licenses and taxi licenses. In that case, a more restrictive measure than restraint can result, according to the Council.
The Council for the Judiciary is also concerned that the bill simply gives the judiciary the power to impose restrictions. “It seems intended especially to take drastic measures in place without first hearing the person concerned,” wrote the judges. “That is highly undesirable.” Only in the event of a ban should be allowed such a thing, in the Council. Finally, the Council believes that someone “on the basis of his behavior” associated with terrorism can be brought to a vague description. “It provides little guidance to the courts.”
Symptom control and impair privacy
Late last month voiced the College of Human Rights already criticized the bill. Drawn up within the framework of the Action Programme Integrated Approach Jihadism in an attempt to counter the government jihadism. According to the college’s plans are mainly symptoms and affect them in privacy. Therefore, the Board called on the government to reconsider the plan.
The government has drawn up proposals for administrative measures in order to circumvent the strong legal protection in criminal law. The College of Human Rights ruled on that despite the need to protect society the proposed plans have to be in line with human rights. The Council for the Judiciary wonders why now much administrative measures should be taken. That need, according to the judges not clear in the current bill
- Read more about this.
- Ad van der Steur
- Council for the Judiciary
- Judges
No comments:
Post a Comment