2024-01-05 05:40:00
Was the new Minister of Justice, Paul Van Tigchelt, going to be as “speedy” as his predecessor, Vincent Van Quickenborne, who resigned? Van Quick was nicknamed “Quicky”. And we had to act quickly at the end of this legislature. Van Tigchelt didn’t hang around either.
The ongoing reforms are on track and, according to MP Vanessa Matz (Les Engagés), all should be completed on time. The reform of the Penal Code was “Van Quick’s” greatest obsession. It was adopted at first reading in Commission before the holidays, amendments were tabled, it will be voted on at second reading in January. It introduces the notion of grading penalties, from 1 to 8, and will determine which offenses will go into which categories.
All this has already been announced. What, at this stage, has been passed over in silence is the reform of the notion of recidivism which, until now was “particular”, specific and which will become “general”.
Basically, judges will have the possibility of imposing heavier sentences by citing recidivism even if the act already convicted is not of the same nature as the new one. In theory, a judge might consider that a defendant, previously convicted of stealing from a store, might be a repeat offender following committing assault and battery leading to death. In a less extreme way, we will take the example of the guy convicted of receiving stolen goods and who, subsequently, would be condemned for having dealt or being the author of immoral acts.
“This provision does not suit me”, comments Vanessa Matz who tabled an amendment aimed at maintaining the state of special recidivism for offenses ranging from 1 to 6. “We risk putting offenses of different seriousness on the same footing. However, scientific results show that harsher sentences do not reduce criminal relapse. That said, the government seems to really care regarding this notion of general recidivism.”
The new Code therefore speaks more of a “fatal driving accident”. For Vanessa Matz, neither term is suitable. “Someone who kills for reasons of excessive speed, drug use or alcohol, it is not an accident. This term will not provide any further relief to the victims.” She therefore suggests talking regarding “road homicide”. ©Photo News
Vanessa Matz, on the other hand, is much more confident in the fact that another of her amendments will be accepted. The new Penal Code plans to eradicate the prevention of involuntary manslaughter through lack of foresight and precaution in road matters. The tragedy of Strépy in March 2022 (6 deaths and 39 injured) struck people’s minds: “To hear that it would be manslaughter is unbearable for the families,” joins the MP. The new Code therefore speaks more of a “fatal driving accident”. For Vanessa Matz, neither term is suitable. “Someone who kills for reasons of excessive speed, drug use or alcohol, it is not an accident. This term will not provide any further relief to the victims.” She therefore suggests talking regarding “road homicide”.
No “feminicide” in the new Penal Code but intra-family homicide will be punishable by life imprisonment
Currently, “manslaughter due to lack of foresight” provides for 3 months to 5 years in prison. The new Penal Code provides for “fatal driving accident” a level 3 penalty, i.e. 3 years to 5 years in prison. Vanessa Matz is asking for a level 4 sentence for “road homicide”, that is to say 5 years to 10 years in prison. “At level 3, a judge might return to 1 via extenuating circumstances. At this point, there would be no jail time.”
This notion of “road homicide” might suit everyone. In France, they introduced it following the Palmade affair…
The draft Sexual Penal Code aims to take prostitution out of the gray zone: the debate in Parliament promises to be heated
1704439141
#Big #legal #change #recidivism #longer #specific #general