2023-06-02 06:22:59
One week following the release ofOliver Vandecasteele, the House debated the conditions of his release. A debate, quite short, which did not make it possible to clarify the way in which the government acted. One question remains wide open, that of respect for the rule of law. This idea that the law imposes itself on political decision-making.
A short debate
The questions came from three opposition parties: N-VA, Vlaams Belang and Defi. With different accents, the three pointed to two issues. First, that of the security of Belgium and its nationals. Because the release of Olivier Vandecasteele was also that of a convicted terrorist, Assadollah Assadi. Like it or not, only Iran won said Peter De Roover N-VA group leader.
Second problem, the procedure. The three representatives of the opposition wondered regarding the choices of the Belgian State. That of article 167 of the constitution which specifies that the conduct of international relations is the responsibility of the executive power. A reversal, while for more than a year the government preferred, in the name of the rule of law, to pass a convention for the transfer of prisoners. It’s a bit technical, but the question here is: why did the government change its procedure at the last moment? Isn’t it therefore out of the rule of law?
Response from the Minister of Justice, it is because of a “serious, imminent and permanent” threat to Belgium. According to Vincent Van Quickenborne, it was not only the risk of Olivier Vandecasteele being sentenced to death, but also the threat of arbitrary arrests of Belgians in Iran or in countries friendly to this regime. The Minister of Foreign Affairs added that Assadollah Assadi was banned from entering Europe. The debate lasted a little over an hour. And normally the Chamber will not return to this episode. But the two questions raised in the hemicycle remain open. Is Belgium’s security ensured? Is the rule of law respected?
Security
On the security of Belgium, the question remains open. By releasing Oliver Vandecasteele you save your life, but by giving in to hostage diplomacy, you risk fueling the machine and posing even greater threats to foreigners in Iran, especially since you release a convicted terrorist. We can talk for hours, we are faced here with an almost insoluble moral dilemma. The answer is political. Executive’s choice, save, Oliver Vandecasteele reflected the choice of public opinion.
rule of law
On the rule of law, here too there are divergent points of view. The answer is in my opinion more obvious with the dust settling: no, Belgium did not respect the rule of law in this procedure. The whole thing is to know if she might do otherwise? After having tried for more than a year a legal transfer procedure which respects the decision of the Belgian justice; the government finally took a discretionary act. One might almost say an arbitrary act, an exceptional act. But an exceptional act which gives itself the appearance of legality by using article 167 of the constitution which says that the government directs international relations. A very extensive use which amounts to saying that one can derogate from national law as soon as there is an exceptional international circumstance.
But the question remains, might Belgium do otherwise from the moment Belgium wanted to release Olivier Vandecasteele? This is the problem, the negotiation with a rogue state where arbitrariness reigns also obliges us to arbitrariness. We release Assadi because the government decided so, in the name of reason of state, period.
The political and moral need to release Olivier Vandecastelle cannot overshadow a debate on the rule of law. Because we can speak of a temporary suspension of the rule of law in this case. A temporary suspension which is added to the non-respect in recent years of thousands of judicial decisions on asylum. Constitutionalist Céline Romainville said in this regard that the rule of law has had its arm twisted in a way that is rarely equaled. To paraphrase Leo Tindemans, following the constitution, it is perhaps the rule of law that is becoming a scrap of paper.
1685693587
#rule #law #scrap #paper
