Code on security measures against perpetrators of terrorist offenses at end of their sentence-France

Code for establishing security measures against perpetrators of terrorist offenses at the end of their sentence-FRANCE

Instaurant des mesures de sûreté à l’encontre des auteurs d’infractions terroristes à l’issue de leur peine.

Scheme of the LawLaw Positive command of sovereign or divine. One can be ruled either by a Statute, a Statue, or a Statement. Legislation is the rule-making process by a political or religious organisation. Physics governs natural law. Logical thinking is a sign of a healthy brain function. Dharma is eternal for Sanatanis.

Since 2017, the majority have been working to guarantee the safety of the French while the terrorist threat remains at a high level. The law of October 30, 2017 strengthening internal security and the fight against terrorism, in particular, enabled France, from the start of the five-year term, to emerge from the state of emergency while preserving the tools necessary to deal with it. : protection perimeters, closures of places of worship, individual administrative control and surveillance measures (MICAS), home visits and foreclosures.

The Parliament monitored the implementation of these mechanisms by exercising, in accordance with Article L. 22-10-1 of the Internal Security Code, enhanced control. This gave rise, to the National Assembly, to a close follow-up of the acts taken for their application, to the uploading of data as well as to trips and hearings which were regularly reported to the committee. laws. The Government, for its part, has already submitted two reports to Parliament on the implementation of the law of October 30, 2017 and indicated that it would propose to extend the application, scheduled until December 31, 2020, of the aforementioned measures. , if necessary by adjusting them.

The Government has also continued the fight against terrorism and radicalization by reorganizing the intelligence services under the aegis of the General Directorate of Internal Security (DGSI), by increasing the material and human resources from which they benefit, by promoting cooperation between forces, information sharing and exchanges with magistrates, by reforming the file of alerts for the prevention of terrorist radicalization (FSPRT). Finally, intense action is being taken in the area of ​​prevention of radicalization, under the authority of the General Secretariat of the Interministerial Committee for the Prevention of CrimeCrime A positive or negative act in violation of penal law; an offense against the state classified either as a felony or misdemeanor. and Radicalization (SG-CIPDR).

Here too, Parliament has played its role through the action of the Parliamentary Intelligence Delegation, a body common to the National Assembly and the Senate whose mission is to monitor the general activity and resources of the intelligence services. The DPR was a force for proposals through recommendations and observations addressed to the President of the RepublicRepublic Res publica. Having a head of the state. Pope is the head of the Vatican City state. The people execute their power through an Elected (direct/indirect) President. Political parties sponsored their presidential candidates. Indian president is a constitutional puppet under the ruling Cabinet. In the case of the appointment of  Indian judges, presidential power is a vanishing point. and to the Prime Minister.

Today ‘ hui, another threat arises.

As of February 4, 2020, according to figures provided by the Minister of the Interior, were detained in French prisons 531 people serving a prison sentence for acts of terrorism (Islamist terrorists – TIS). 43 of them should be released in 2020, around 60 in 2021, 46 in 2022.

However, some of these people may present, on release from detention, serious risks of repetition or of acting out. They will be followed, of course, but the state of our law does not guarantee that they can be followed in a manner adapted to their potential dangerousness.

Administratively, these people may be subject to individual administrative control and surveillance measures (MICAS), but the duration of these measures may not in any case exceed twelve months.

On the judicial level, they are often de jure or de facto excluded from the benefit of certain adjustments or reductions in sentence, on which traditionally the monitoring systems of a detainee on his release are based:

– persons convicted of acts of terrorism can no longer benefit, since the law of 21 July 2016 extending the state of emergency, from “automatic” sentence reduction credits: the post ‑ sentence follow-up which they can do. object can therefore only run for the duration of “additional” sentence reduction credits, the granting of which is, moreover, generally refused by the judge responsible for the application of sentences specializing in terrorism;

– the law of July 21, 2016 also excluded these people from the benefit of the mechanisms for splitting and suspending the sentence as well as the semi-liberty and work release regimes in the event of a two-year prison sentence or for prisoners who have a prison sentence of less than two years to serve.

Finally, SITs are not always eligible for the surveillance measures provided for by current law:

– it can be difficult to establish medically their dangerousness, many not suffering from psychological disorders or practicing the dissimulation: however, the placement under mobile electronic surveillance (PSEM) of an individual within the framework of a socio-judicial follow-up or judicial supervision is conditional on the completion of a medical expert’s report noting a dangerousness or a risk of recurrence;

– it is sometimes impossible to submit to surveillance measures given the offense prosecuted or quantum incurred penalty or pronounced: thus, retention (not applicable in any event to persons sentenced before the publication of the law ) and security surveillance can only concern certain perpetrators of sexual or violent crimes;

– these first two obstacles are cumulative in the case of detention and security surveillance: the first must be based on the very high probability of the person recidivating due to a serious personality disorder observed at the end a multidisciplinary assessment of dangerousness accompanied by a medical expertise, while the second, when pronounced following judicial surveillance or socio-judicial monitoring, must be preceded by a medical assessment noting the persistence of dangerousness;

– finally, the principle of non-retroactivity of the more severe criminal law precludes the application of some of these measures when the acts were committed prior to their adoption: this is the case for the security detention; This is also the case, for example, of the extension, by the law of 3 June 2016 strengthening the fight against organized crime, of socio-judicial monitoring to perpetrators of terrorist offenses, which is only applicable to persons having committed such offenses after the entry into force of this law.

The authors of this bill believe that ‘ it is necessary to meet a legitimate concern of the French, the expectations of those involved for their safety and in a spirit of responsibility, ‘ introduce into our law a regime ad hoc in safety. Such is the ‘ subject of this bill.

This ad hoc regime , which would apply to people convicted of acts of terrorism and in the process of being released when the existing systems prove to be insufficient, would thus strengthen the tools available to our country to prevent the risk of passage. to the act. In order to be applicable immediately, as soon as the law comes into force, it must not be qualified or be qualified as a penalty: it must be a question of security measures.

In this perspective, the single article of this bill provides:

– to retain, in relation to existing measures which cannot be applied retroactively, the constraints essential to its purpose: obligation to respond to summonsSummons It means an application to the Court in relation to an action or appeal which has to be served on other parties or non‑parties. from the judge responsible for the enforcement of sentences, establish his residence in a specific place, obtain an authorization before any change of employment or residence as well as for any travel abroad, obligation of periodic presentation, prohibitions on entering into relations and appearing in certain places, placement under mobile electronic surveillance;

– to request the prior opinionOpinion A judge's written explanation of a decision of the court. In an appeal, multiple opinions may be written. The court’s ruling comes from a majority of judges and forms the majority opinion. A dissenting opinion disagrees with the majority because of the reasoning and/or the principles of law on which the decision is based. A concurring opinion agrees with the end result of the court but offers further comment possibly because they disagree with how the court reached its conclusion. of the multidisciplinary commission for security measures, which will have access to rule on all the documents in the judicial and prison files, on the dangerousness of the person concerned;

– to submit the pronouncement of these measures to a decision of the penalty enforcement tribunal, whose collegial training is an essential guarantee given the particular sensitivity of the measures envisaged;

– provide that the security measures would be ordered for a period of one year, renewable within a limit of ten years in correctional matters and twenty years in criminal matters;

– to allow the data subject to request the modification or lifting of these measures.

All the other guarantees currently provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure before the pronouncement of special post-sentence surveillance measures, including the adversarial principle, will naturally apply to this new regime.

Failure to comply with the obligations and prohibitions imposed by the security measures would be punishable by three years’ imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros.

This new possibility of monitoring people serving a prison sentence for acts of terrorism is today essential to ensure the safety of the French under good conditions.

Statute of France-March 10, 2020.