english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Home arrow newsitems arrow France/Grand Debat/Gilets Jaunes: Droit Citoyen à Dialogue avant Decisions = Solution Démocratique ?

France/Grand Debat/Gilets Jaunes: Droit Citoyen à Dialogue avant Decisions = Solution Démocratique ?

Written by ACM
Wednesday, 06 February 2019
eurofora_double_logo


*Strasbourg/NewsViewpoint (+m.à.j.)/Angelo Marcopolo/- Au coeur d'une Solution de compromis possible au conflit socio-politique dit des "Gilets Jaunes" en France, (qu'on essaie de résoudre, entre autre, aussi par un "Grand Débat" actuellement en cours), pourait être la reconnaissance d'un nouveau Droit Citoyen au Dialogue avec les Autorités Publiques avant les Décisions qui affectent les persones interessées et/ou la Société dans son ensemble.  

"Eurofora" avance, analyse et soutient une telle réforme démocratique moderne, dépuis longtemps, pour l'ensemble de l'Europe. Et une serie d' appuis juridiques concrets existent déjà, aussi bien en France qu' au plan de l'UE, etc. Des recherches originales en droit public, dépuis près de 40 années, en France et ailleurs en Europe ou dans le Monde, qui arrivent bientôt à un point culminant, semblent le prouver clairement.

In s'agirait d'un vrai "Droit", guarantissant une Procedure d' information et écoute des Citoyens, doublée d'une obligation de répondre à leurs observations critiques, avant la décision finale, sous le contrôle de juges indépendants, pour le caractère suffisant, vrai et correct (p.ex. cohérent, légal, proportionel, etc) des réponses données par l' Administration Publique de l'Etat aux arguments eventuellement presentés par le Peuple.

Ainsi, (avec attention pour qu'on ne paralyse pas indument l'action efficace de gouvernements democratiquement élus avec d'eventuels abus excessivement proceduralistes, surtout dans certains domains-clé : p.ex. Sécurité/Terrorisme, Investisments Cruciaux pour le développement économique et/ou Scientifique, etc), la voie d'un Dialogue transparent Démocratique, avec utilisation aussi des Technologies Modernes de Communication, grâce au Numerique, etc, pourrait s' ouvrir à l' horizon.

Le RIC (soutenu par plusieurs "Gilets Jaunes", et d'autres), peut-être un beau "rêve" pour l' avenir, mais force est de constater qu'en réalité, même 1,5 Siècle après la Commune de Paris, la Société actuelle ne paraît pas prête à l' adopter, (au moins pas dans sa forme "complète" avec 3 volets, comme voulu par des GJ). Et ce fait ne devrait pas bloquer toute solution au conflit actuel. En revanche, une telle idée pourrait être portée par des mouvements socio-politiques d'idées, voire des Partis nouveaux, s'ils les souhaitent, et ainsi soumise aux débats d'idées démocratiques, voire même aux Votes du Peuple, ici et ailleurs, pour un avenir, qui, peut-être, ne serait pas trop lointain.

 + Entre temps, vu aussi que plusieurs "gilets jaunes" auraient déjà rejeté des débats sans vote, ni suite, certaines propositions, de lege ferenda, visent la possibilité d'un Vote, qui, en cas de réussite des contestataires, ne permetrait aux Autorités Publiques de l'ignorer et passer outre, avec des mésures (manifestement) non necessaires et/ou disproportionnées, par rapport à des intérêts légitimes importants, que pouraient évoquer les citoyens concernés. (Dans ce cas, on ne saurait craindre un soi-disant "Gouvernement des Juges", car il y aurait aussi un verdict Populaire, et des enjeux incontestablement sérieux). C'est une idée supplementaire, à examiner, creuser, peaufiner/ajuster et débattre...

 

(../..)

 

---------------------

 

Enterprise Europe Network

Statistics

Visitors: 34367845

Archive

Login Form





Remember me

Lost your Password?
No account yet? Create account

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

 

pace_freeze_meps_400_01

They voted to "freeze" UK Government's draft to put People in jail for 42 Days on "anti-terrorist" suspicion without charge, or they abstained. Don't they look suspect ?
-------------------------

CoE's debate on UK controversy stirs PanEuropean check of anti-terror suspects' imprisonment

Former Leftists of the Sixties would boil in hot water if they heard PACE's debate on the controversial 42 days detention without charge, currently drafted by the British Government :

A "Socialist" Government, a Socialist PACE Rapporteur and a Socialist Chair of PACE's Legal Committee, opposed a .. "Conservative" amendment (supported by .. Liberals, Democrats, etc), to freeze the measure, in order to protect Citizens' Freedom, by "waiting" until CoE's Venice Committee checks its conformity with Human Rights' principles.

"Left"'s support to Conservative-Lib.Dem's criticism, wasn't enough to obtain a majority, nor to make things as they were back in the good old days, when "Left" and "Right" had a clear meaning, as "liberty" and "restrictions"...

Conservatives and most Democrats were joined by the Left in voting for the "freeze", as well as Liberal Paul Rowen, while Socialist MEP Ivan Popescu, an experienced MEP from Ukraine (PACE Member since 1996-2008) abstained. But most Socialists, added to a few Liberals and EPP's Right, voted against.

Fortunately, someone inside PACE had the wise idea to shorten the Debate for less than 1 Hour, and put it on the Agenda only at the end of an exceptionally busy day, towards the end of the Evening, when most MEPs had already gone to taste wins and foods at various Receptions all around Strasbourg's "European" area : As a result, not even 42 MEPs weren't present..

Socialist Lord Tomlinson accused the leaders of the PanEuropean Assembly, in its highest body : the "Bureau", to "lack wisdom" by deciding to hold a Debate on an issue that neither the Socialist Chair of the Legal Committee, nor its Socialist "reluctant Rapporteur", did "not want to do", ...

tomllinson

Finally, everybody (critics and supporters alike) was happy to agree, in substance, that the controversial measure "may" gravely violate Human Rights, and therefore, PACE asked Legal Experts of Venice Commission to check UK Government''s plans.

But this might take more than .. 42 Days to do, since PACE's Rapporteur asked the Experts to enlarge their study in a PanEuropean comparison of all that is happening on "anti-terrorism" legislation in 47 CoE Member Countries, including Russia, Turkey and Azerbaidjan..

Bad lack : "The existing 28 days’ detention without charge in the UK is, in comparison with other CoE member countries, one of the most extreme : In Turkey, the period is 7,5 days, in France 6 days, in Russia 5 days, and in .. the U.S. and Canada just 2 and 1 days respectively", denounced Democrat MEP Ms WOLDSETH from Norway..

woldsteth

"Numerous respected human rights organisations, including Liberty and Human Rights Watch, have expressed serious concern" "The proposed legislation ...could easily lead to extensive abuses. ...Detention for 42 days means six weeks in which one is taken away from one’s family, friends, home and livelihood only to be let off without being charged. That will destroy lives and isolate communities", she added.

- "3 years ago, the UK Government sought to increase the period of pre-charge detention from 14 days to 90 days. Not long before that, it had been only 7 days. There was a vigorous debate ...and a ...compromise was reached of 28 days. We have to ask whether there are proper safeguards in place to extend the period to 42 days. I suggest that there are fatal flaws", reminded British Conservative Clappison.

- "What sort of society holds someone in detention for 42 days and does not have to tell the person who is in prison why they are there, or explain the suspicions that arose and led to their detention? What sort of society believes that that is the way to treat its citizens? That is an appalling injustice, ...A 42-day detention period will not make the UK safer. Instead, it will be the first step to giving in to terrorists; it is saying that we are prepared to sacrifice our democratic rights and the principles for which we have stood for centuries", criticized British Liberal Michael Hanckock

hancock

"Comments made ...by Norwegian delegates are unfortunate", replied British Socialist MEP Ms.Curtis-Thomas, accusing them to "besmirch the reputation of our police force, which is one of the Best in the World", as she said, believing that "there are significant safeguards ...to ensure that individuals are not subjected to unlawful detention"

curtis

PACE "has serious doubts whether ...the draft legislation are in conformity with the ...case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. A lack of ..safeguards may lead to arbitrariness, resulting in breaches of ... liberty and ...right to a fair trial". PACE "is particularly concerned that: ..the judge ..may not be in a position to examine whether there exist reasonable grounds for suspecting that the arrested person has committed an offence;"; that "... representation by a lawyer may be inappropriately restricted or delayed;" that "information on the grounds for suspicion of a person ...may be unduly withheld.. ;" that this "may give rise to arrests without the intention to charge;", and; in general, that "prolonged detention without proper information on the grounds for arrest may constitute inhuman treatment", says Klaus De Vries' Report, adopted with 29 votes against zero.

vries

Records don't say if it took him 42 Days to draft his Report, but, at least, he knew why...

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Results

SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.