I. Jean-Vincent Place wants to re-create stateless
And here that Jean-Vincent Place advocated "a measure that is truly egalitarian for all the French."
"I wish we reflect to expand, including the deprivation of nationality, the French only French I know the difficulty of creating stateless persons, there is a real international convention debate," he said.
A naturalized French person takes that kind of place, the arms fall into me ...
A ministrable, it dares all, that's how we recognize even the ...
Nathalie Nathalie Kosciusko-Morizet says (Source: a good article Lab Europe 1, go read it)
"I personally find quite consistent deprivation of nationality to all those born or not French, dual nationals or not, who committed terrorist acts.". Hmmm ...
But even Chevènement puts it ...
Reflecting on a commission of inquiry into the errors of the French Diplomacy, no, but that, yes ...
This is the problem when one yields on a principle ("nationality of forfeiture of NOT, NEVER, not well"), the arm eventually snapped: take everyone, we created stateless, it extends to the assassins of children and police officers, then a private citizen, and then we move on to rape etc etc. There can be no end to the escalation.
You will notice that the FN plays cards on the table, her:
In any case, we are preparing: the next attack (yes, because it is agitated on a topic of important principle, but would not prevent the attacks, and that never prevent any) return debate on the death penalty - but beware, just to think about it, huh ...
Archive:
Like what, the indignity is timeless ...
II. But yes, you can create stateless ..
A reader lawyer blog caught my attention (thank you) to the fact that to create stateless was a priori not prohibited by international law which is subject France (note, in general, when a politician talks about " international law "or" all international laws "is often wrong. Always he quotes 1 or 2 texts and check ...)
We speak indeed in general:
1 / the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948:
Article 15
1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
But it has no binding, no real legal effect, it is a proclamation of rights as the many resolutions adopted by the General Assembly of the UN.
2 / The Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons of 1954 aims to improve the conditions of stateless persons, particularly vulnerable, by treating them as refugees and not to prohibit their existence.
3 / C onvention of Reduction of Stateless Persons of 1961 states:
Art 8-1: "The Contracting States may not deprive of their nationality if such deprivation would render him stateless."
but also :
Art 8-2: "Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article, a Contracting State may retain the right to deprive a person of his nationality if he shall, at the time of signature, ratification or accession, a declaration to that effect specifying one or more grounds specified in its national law at that date and entering the following categories: a) If an individual under conditions involving on his part a lack of loyalty to the Contracting State,
i) in defiance of an express prohibition by the State rendered or continued to provide assistance to another State, or received or continued to receive emoluments from another State, or
ii) Had a behavior likely to cause serious prejudice to the essential interests of the State;
And indeed, France made use of this option at its signing by a reserve:
"At the time of signing this Agreement, the Government of the French Republic declares that it reserves to use when deposit the instrument of ratification thereof, of the option open to him by Article 8, paragraph 3, as provided by this provision.
But he did not even have to do, as if France has signed the Convention in 1962, it was never ratified, so it has no legal force in France
(Source: UN here and there Only dark green countries have ratified the 1961 Convention is applicable to them - it's not heavy ....)
4 / The European Convention on Nationality of 1997, the Council of Europe:
Art 7: A State Party may provide in its internal law for the loss of its nationality ex lege or at the initiative, except in the following cases:
a voluntary acquisition of another nationality;
b acquisition of the nationality of the State partly as a result of fraudulent conduct, false information or concealment of any relevant fact attributable to the applicant;
c voluntary service in a foreign military force;
d conduct seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the State Party ;
e lack of a genuine link between the State Party and a national habitually residing abroad;
f where it is established during the minority of a child that the conditions laid down by internal law which led to the acquisition of right to the nationality of the State Party are no longer fulfilled;
g adoption of a child if the child acquires or possesses the foreign nationality of one or both adoptive parents. [...]
3 A State Party may not provide in its internal law for the loss of its nationality under paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article if the person concerned would thereby become stateless, except for the cases mentioned in paragraph 1, subparagraph b, of this article.
The, for once, it is clearly prohibited without exception.
Except that France signed in 2000 but not yet ratified ...
So again, this is not about France ...
5 / In any case, if a treaty concerned France, it would be sufficient to denounce it or to add a reservation, if she wanted.
There is no protection to be expected from this ...
Read the reviews we would be bound hand and foot by an international treaty ad infinitum, it's amazing ignorance of the law ...
PS By the way, an interesting testimony on stateless persons here on Slate (although they redeeming the media, in 2010 ...).
III. Mr. Holland, do you explain ...
Mr. Holland, I took your speech to Congress on November 16. It says that you want to apply to the forfeiture of French people born (although you insist on this innovation that even the FN had never advanced, challenging the jus soli and jus sanguinis, as the son of French will be affected), but tell that to apply especially for:
"A person convicted of a violation of fundamental interests of the nationor a terrorist act"
Terrorism, I see well enough (well the concept is certainly debatable, but the penal code defines it as pretty much commit attacks), but what exactly is "an attack on the fundamental interests of the Nation"?
Then Mr. Holland, as you hold your position (this is the big problem of low disease; sometimes it takes a decision at the last second, obviously bad, and then it persists to prove that it exists ...), could you tell us in what cases this is supposed to apply terrorism OUT please?
Especially as your draft constitutional law, is even harder, as there is even the word "terrorism" in:
So forfeiture for:
"A French-born person holding another nationality may be deprived of French nationality when convicted of a crime constituting a serious attack on the life of the Nation"
While Hollande, what are all the "crimes constituting a serious attack on the life of the Nation" please?
We can not know at this stage ...
In any case, Daech hat, your plan goes smoothly - like Bin Laden in 2001, what a victory! -, So you'll manage to make us change our Constitution with 10 men.
IV. In Memoriam
Because it can fetch far the "serious harm to life of the Nation", depending on who decides ...
Law of 23 July 1940 concerning the forfeiture of French nationality of those who left France (OG 07/1940)
We, Marshal of France, the French head of state,
The Council of Ministers heard,
Decree:
First article. - All French who left in French metropolitan territory between May 10 and June 30, 1940 to travel abroad without regular task order from the competent authority without just cause or be regarded as having heardevade loads and duties of the members of the national community and therefore have renounced French citizenship.
It will, therefore, deprived of that nationality by decree issued on the report of the Minister of Justice, Minister Secretary of State for Justice.
This will take effect from the date fixed by the decree and may be extended to women and children who have followed the person.
Art. 2. - Property belonging to those against whom forfeiture of French nationality has been pronounced by application of the preceding Article shall, at the request of the prosecution, sequestrated by order of the President of the Civil Court of the place of their situation .
This Ordinance shall be published by decree in the Official Journal.
It will, at the request of the prosecution, process, on the expiry of a period of six months from the date of insertion of the order, in liquidation, under the authority of the president of the Civil Court and under the supervision of the prosecution.
The balance of the proceeds of the liquidation will be paid to the fund of the National Relief.
Art. 3. - This Decree shall be published in the Official Journal and enforced as State law.
So Tribute to:
December 8, Charles de Gaulle, went to England (sentenced to death on 12 August):
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire