vendredi, février 02, 2018

02.02.18, back jihadists10, ghosts, jihadists, right, lawyers, kurdistan, syria, iraq, may 68

Blog: madic50.blogspot.com / Book: The two forms, ed. Amazon


Paris, Friday, February 2, 2018


Copy to:
President of the Republic / Prime Minister / Attorney General

Presidents of Parliament / Presidents of parliamentary groups
President of the Court of Appeal / Attorney General
President of the TGI / Attorney General
barrister
journalists

REFLECTION ON THE DELEGATION OF POWER WHAT IS THE RIGHT OF THE RETURN OF JIHADISTS


1. Preamble
The following discussion concerns the public debate on the return of the French jihadists from the Levant.

It is based on the statements and representations of the lawyers of the above.

These actions of jurists are taken here as the formalized expression of an opinion shared by sociopolitical circles which develop their own politics at least since May 68.

However, the criticism of these opinions does not in any way concern the merits of lawyers' professional freedom of action.




1) - The geographical absences of the right

1- The complaints
As it was predictable, Wednesday, January 17, 2018, the jihadists' lawyers file a complaint against the French State which opposes the return of these or claims to control the flow.

These complaints were filed on behalf of the "parents and grandparents" of the jihadist detainees and their children.

2- The nonexistent
The lawyer Marie Dosé is engaged on television. For her "Syrian Kurdistan is not a state and the judicial institutions do not exist". The other lawyers involved share this view.

As a result, say the lawyers of the families of these French jihadists arrested by Kurdish fighters in Syria: "These women and these children are all detained without right or title".

This would be the case because their place of detention, Syrian Kurdistan, is an area of ​​lawlessness. According to the French media expression, it would be a legal void.

3- The transfer of fault
Syrian Kurdistan does not exist so much that the French state is legally accountable for the arrests committed by these non-existent.

By not demanding from this incompetent organization Kurdistan that he immediately hand over the prisoners illegally detained to the French "judicial institutions"; the French State is guilty of "arbitrary detention" and "abuse of authority".

Hence the complaints.

4- The judicial privilege
According to these lawyers, this judicial non-existence of Syrian Kurdistan places the French government under an obligation to assert its judicial privileges with regard to its nationals.

These judicial privileges consist of:
a- First to declare that French law is superior to the local rights concerned.
b- This superiority is essential for all French jihadists.
c- The government's willingness to examine the return of jihadists "on a case-by-case basis" is already a crime.
d- This hypothesis "is already a form of arbitrariness which denies the principle of equality before the law".
Why, indeed, would any one benefit from the true right, in other words from French law, when such other would remain in the emptiness of the barbarians' right?
f- Local states become "zones".

5- Law and barbarism
For lawyer Dosé, the whole procedure is subject to the rule of French privilege; that is, Western.

The idea of ​​a trial outside France, among the savages, is simply unthinkable, incomprehensible: "and now we are talking about trials in Syrian Kurdistan".
The trial of an alleged French criminal in the Levant, and then what else!

b- On the two ways of considering that certain detainees can be judged by right on the place of their alleged crimes (the "case by case" and the trial in the Middle East) the judgment of Maitre Dosé is without appeal: "That n It does not make sense, it's improvisation and incompetence. "

c- On the general question of the existence, in this file, of a right in Syria or Iraq, outside the French law, the sentence falls "One swims in delirium facing a historical problem. "

d- Speaking on behalf of her confreres and, at that time, support for the jihadists, she described the statements made by the spokesman of the government as "extremely worrying".

6- The colonial breed
a- Who can say the right?
Maitre Dosé: "For now, the question is not whether they are really repentant or cheat, but to repatriate them to be judged, It is our justice who will say who they are. Arrest warrants have been issued, the charges have been started in France, where anti-terrorist justice is anything but lax. "

b- The lesson
A supporter of the return of the jihadists, the honorary commissioner Moréas became a lawyer, gives the lesson of right that the world expected from France:
"Indeed, a terrorist tried abroad, if he was acquitted, could no longer be prosecuted on French soil. He could return home with impunity. This is apparent from Article 113-9 of the Penal Code: "No prosecution may be brought against a person justifying that it has been definitely tried abroad for the same facts. Can a foreign country be allowed to do justice for us? "

c- Commentary
Only French justice can say the right.
Acquittal is a privilege of French or Western courts.
Only the French justice can judge French in violation abroad.

Conclusion: Who delirium?

2) - The criminal novelty
Jihadist crime differs from ordinary crime not first by its cruelty, each of its acts is a war crime, but first by its structure.

Jihadism is a continuous global criminal journey where each sequence here prepares the other one elsewhere.

Two examples:

1- The present
Ms Köning, whose repatriation is requested, sent a message to her two children in France in a video in 2013: "Do not forget that you are Muslim," she says. Jihad will not stop as long as there are enemies to fight. "

2- The past
On his blog, the honorary commissioner Moréas, fierce supporter of the "return" of the jihadists, reports:
“We are in an inextricable situation because, again, our leaders have been improvident: not one, it seems, has thought about the post-victory. Yet we have already experienced this situation ...
After the Dayton Agreement of December 14, 1995, which ended the Bosnian war, foreign militiamen defending the Muslim cause were asked to return home. Thus, a group of French, distraught, but having tasted the power of arms, decided to help the "international Islamist movement", which will later be referred to as Al Qaeda . They join an international network that was set up around Fateh Kamel, who chose Montreal for headquarters. Nine "ghosts" engage in robberies to finance jihad. You do not have to give their name, but they are the first French jihadists. When RAID police blast the door of their hideout in Roubaix, they are greeted by gusts of Kalashnikovs. They fight back. The shot is fed. A policeman has a perforated lung despite his bulletproof vest. The besieged are unleashed. They scream "We'll never go! One of them throws a grenade from the floor. The explosion ignites a mattress. The fire spreads quickly and the house eventually collapsed. 1000 cartridges farther, firefighters will remove four bodies from the rubble.
Survivors will be sentenced to long prison terms. The investigation has highlighted the existence of a large Al-Qaeda-linked network, and it is largely thanks to the evidence gathered in France that other countries will become aware of the threat of international terrorism and react accordingly. The dead did not teach us anything.”

This story, as well as Ms. Köning's statement, portrays the structure of jihadist crime.

3- It's globalized crime.
These people do not go to fight in Syria because something is happening there.

They go there because it is the place from which they can chase the fight against "the enemy".

At each trip, they may have the strength to return, to travel, to renew, the terror and ensure its propagation.

They did not go to Bosnia because there was a war. They went there because they could train in the war, transport it to other countries, including theirs, and maintain it.

In the long run, and the more the better, it radically changes the judicial system for Terrorism.

4- The indispensable procedural aggiornamento
It is no longer possible to be in the judicial separation of states. The cooperation is itself rendered obsolete.

a- Ordinary justice
The current system allows a criminal to renounce crime by taking refuge in his country, which will not extradite him.

This provision is indispensable for ordinary crime. It usually makes national countries, said of origin, back-bases of withdrawal for the completed, failed, lost offensives.

b- The jihadist diversion
Jihad uses these provisions to make national countries places of reorganization of the forces to leave in the terror in particular in the country of nationality.

What was to be a place of abandonment of combat becomes a place of expansion of terror especially in the country of withdrawal and protection.

National judicial criteria can no longer function in the same way with crime that is no longer "foreign" but "global".

c- Justice for jihad
Jihadism builds a global judicial continuity.

The place of judgment must be the one where the most significant crimes took place to produce this enterprise of destruction of the states that is the Caliphate.

If these "foreign militia" had been tried in Bosnia or sent back to Bosnia for trial, their political situation would have been less popular, their criminality less easy to expand and more easily controlled.

In the short term, either France (any other State) will accept that the other States concerned are parties to the lawsuit and that their legal requirements apply, or it will have to deliver its nationals to the most affected State by the action of this or that criminal of the Terrorist type.

This extradition of a national to a country that was for him a place of jihad does not emerge from ordinary extradition agreements but from the future functioning of ordinary justice for terrorist crimes.

In a globalized criminal journey that includes the country of nationality, national protection becomes a complicity of states towards crimes committed against their own populations.

The globalized case, known as the Roubaix gang, bears witness to this.

3) - The answers of law
The legal principles aimed at disqualifying the Middle East courts on behalf of the law run counter to the principles of law themselves.

A- Detention
The lawyers of the families of these French jihadists arrested by Kurdish fighters in Syria ensure that "these women and children are all detained without right or title".

If words make sense, lawyers speak here of "detention" and not of judgment.

However, these people are detained by right.

1- The Syrian Kurdish Federation (called Rojaia, "the West" in Kurdish) or Syrian Kurdistan is a fighting force recognized by the international community.
a- This fighting force leads the war against a foreign invasion called "Islamic State" or "Daesch".
b) The State in title is no longer able to repel this invasion alone.

2- To challenge the Syrian Kurdish Federation the right to make prisoners of war among the Daesh fighters requires challenging the merits of the military opposition to ISIS.

3- Syrian Kurdistan holds the Daesch French rightfully and legally as prisoners of war.
a. This detention is all the more lawful as it was desired by some of them.
b- They are alleged prisoners of war criminals.
c- They must be detained until handed over to a competent judicial authority to judge them.

The argument of detention without right or title is therefore a professional misconduct.

B- Local competence or international competence

1- The confusion
The lawyers of these suspected adult criminals thus take for granted that the French State has judicial capacities with regard to their arrested clients, and sometimes rather received and then arrested, on the Kurdish territory of Syria.

This claim is based on a failure in the distinction between the two types of French jihadists:
a- Those who have returned to France and thus benefit from France's refusal to extradite its nationals.
b- Those who are still on foreign soil and therefore mechanically dependent on the law in force in this country.

The French justice can judge its nationals present on its soil for crimes committed abroad but it can not take the place of the local justices to judge French present on their soil.

Colonial law has been terminated in law since 1946 and in fact since 1962.

2- Provision of prisoners
Syrian Kurdistan has no right to try Daesh fighters since it is not a constituted state.

He has the right to take prisoners but he does not have the legal capacity to try them.

For the same reasons that he is not a State, he has no right to dispose of them, to hand them over to anyone on his own, let alone to negotiate them politically or for other reasons.

He is just obliged to hand them over to a competent judicial authority.

This is not based on the alleged nationality of the perpetrators but on the place of commission of the crimes.

3- Jurisdiction
The jihadists returned to France can argue their presence on the soil of their nationality.

It is not obvious at all but it is a current fact.

On the other hand, the French jihadists prisoners of Kurdistan are on the scene of the commission of the facts.

Jurisdiction is thus that of the legally constituting States these places.

This local justice alone is competent to judge the future of these prisoners of war presumed guilty of war crimes.

Only she can legally investigate, qualify, judge, pronounce.

Only an international judicial body could replace it.

What would be "without right or title" would be that Syrian Kurdistan voluntarily hand over these prisoners to the French authorities.

This could be called Trafficking in people.

C- The State

1- The Zone
The reasoning of the jihadist lawyers is to say that the privilege of competence of the French state stems from the absence of a local state. This one is also called "zone".

The judicial incapacity of the Kurdish military-political entity would be an illustration of this.

It's wrong. There is no legal vacuum.

The existence in this region of constituted, legal, recognized States is a fact. They were formed by the Treaty of Versailles.

Apart from producing the signature of another international treaty, these states are the only judicial entities competent to judge crimes committed on their soil.

This exclusivity is recognized for Iraq.

2- Syria
But if Syrian Kurdistan is not a state it is first because no one wants to recognize this title. He presents himself as a federal entity.

It is part of a sovereign state, recognized by the UN, which is the Syrian state.

It is up to the lawyers to produce documents attesting to the non-existence of the Syrian state.

The existence of the Syrian State and its functional juridical competence are recognized by all the authorities, including academics, who have to deal with the subject:
"Rojava does not claim to be a state in its own right but prefers to see itself as" a model for a future decentralized system of federal governance in Syria ". For Fabrice Balanche, geographer and specialist of Syria, it is rather "a parallel administration alongside the Syrian administration".
"The Kurds are trying to set up a real administration, but the Syrian regime still has control over property titles or identity documents, for example,"
he told HuffPost. "Kurdish neighborhood committees can settle small disputes, but this jurisdiction is always in a higher Syrian jurisdiction". "

As long as this state is recognized by international law, no one can judge crimes committed on its territory in place of Syrian national justice.

D- The French State

1- State authority
Although the French government does not recognize the cadres in office in the Syrian state, it has no right to override the existence of a Syrian judicial authority and the exclusivity of its jurisdiction over crimes committed in Syria. its jurisdiction.

Moreover, he recognizes the validity of Kurdistan's independent and armed administrative activity and recognizes the legal primacy of the Syrian State and Justice over its own activity.

Except to take advantage of a military presence, and to rely on an outdated imagination of colonialism, the French government has no right to override the qualified opinion of Syrian justice.

The fact of being able to conceal, by the circumstances, the existence and the primacy of this justice does not remove anything from the power of this one or the flattery of those who reject it.

After the crime still injugated the action in Libya; the negotiation, merchandising and sale of the fate of so-called French prisoners would complete the disqualification of France in the region.

The action of the French State can not be to circumvent the sovereignty or the exclusive jurisdiction of these States.

2- The action of the French State
The French state can not follow the maneuvers of the French jihadists who were able to fight in Iraq and come to Syria to be able to benefit from a French doubt regarding the capacity of judgment of Syrian justice.

Given the war, the chaos, the accusations, the function of the French State is to contribute to determining by the international community, the UN, under what conditions and in what forms these recognized states and judicial institutions are represented on a case-by-case basis and work on the targeted crime.

In practice: to what representation of the judicial authority should Kurdish fighters hand over the jihadist prisoners of war they hold legally?

But participation in this definition is diplomatic. It can not be a substitute for this competent justice.

The French state must provoke the presence of Syrian justice from the particular recognized provincial administration of Kurdistan.

It must be distinguished from the Turkish state that uses the military invasion to dictate to Syrians the administrative organization of their state.

He must already say it unequivocally and the rest will follow.

E- The distinction of places of judicial affiliation
This quarrel of judicial precedence does not answer the question raised by the specificity of the crime of Daesh or Islamic State.

The government said it would consider returning jihadists "on a case-by-case basis." This implies that the "cases" are distinct.

1- The legal place of Mosul
Indeed, the jihadists did not leave Syria or Iraq. They left to become ISIS combatant officials.

That these criminals traveled through the conquests and expansions of the Caliphate, whether they were here or there at the time of their arrest, is not necessarily the judicial priority.

They subordinated themselves to an armed and ideological group criminal, compact, disciplined, unified, centralized, claiming for itself the title of State and whose center is Mosul.

The capital of this criminal group is in Mosul.

It was from Mosul that they were required, placed, trained, armed, engaged.

It is up to the democratic states to establish unequivocally that the legal capital, the center of direction, thought, justification, rallying, of the Islamic State is Mosul.

2- The judicial consequences
The French jihadists did not engage in "Syrian" or "Iraqi" movements with the usual pathos of "national liberation"; as in the Spanish Catalan province or the French department Corsica.

They are engaged as cogs of a State whose primary function is conquest and precisely that of the world.

They can not personally get rid of this attachment and select according to their will the acts that bind them to this organization.

It's not for them to choose the qualifications of their crimes. They are not competent to say whether they are group fighters based in Syria or ISIS fighter officials whose capital is Mosul.

It is not legally admissible to claim that they are exclusively under Syrian justice on the sole ground that their last duty station was Raqqa in Syria.

They can only distinguish their actions from those of Daesh in the judicial process.

F- Affiliation a priori
A priori their legal affiliation is as follows:
1- The jihadists are the de facto officials of the Islamic State whose capital is Mosul.
2- These litigants were arrested on Syrian or Iraqi territory as part of the exclusive military fight against Daesch
3- They are therefore both:
a- Judicial procedures put in place by the Iraqi state to try the factious criminals who privatized part of the territory in view of conquests and that from the city of Mosul, Iraq.
b- Syrian State judicial proceedings of which Syrian Kurdistan is an administrative entity.
4- The Iraqi State is competent to judge all crimes committed by the jihadists of Daesch.
5- The Syrian state is competent to judge the crimes committed on its territory by the Daesch jihadists.

In these territories, the French State has no rights other than the consular watch over its suspected criminal nationals.

His only right is to request that his nationals be presented to a competent court and contribute to his determination.

The French state must therefore ask the fighting authorities of Kurdistan to contact Syrian justice and the Iraqi judiciary to organize the legal and complete legal action vis-à-vis each of the so-called "French" prisoners.

And to begin with, judges must determine if they are legally French.

G- The Tartuffes
These lawyers turn to the courts and mobilize public opinion in the name of the defense of "equality before the law" in favor of alleged war criminals in order to be able to adjudicate formal offenses such as criminal conspiracy and the unlawful departure.

This legal action is presented publicly as a defense of human rights. In fact, it denies the populations and States concerned the right to hold these suspected criminals accountable.

It claims the defense of the right. In fact, it denies the equality of justices, magistrates, according to the place of the country in the scale of the world power.

None of these professionals would require the extradition of a Frenchman who allegedly committed similar crimes, or otherwise, in the United States.

While the death penalty is enshrined in the laws and torture is in the judicial practice for cases of jihadism.

This can only question the approach of people who present themselves as the spokespersons of virtue.

4) - The path towards the Delegation of Power
In this debate our gaze is oriented towards Syria, "the complicated East".

However, the Levant is not the only theater of this debate. The French scene is one of them.

By a trick of legal conjuring, the jihadists come to France to be presented to its courts and come out with a Delegation of Power.

1- Inversion
The legal or civil support of the jihadists explain to us that France is required to demand the presence on its soil of certain war criminals recognized as such and who want to destroy it.

It must welcome them, under the family, protect them, under the respect of human rights, justify them, in the fight against the barbarism of gas users.

They would have made mistakes, certainly, but first of all vis-à-vis France. Because their conduct would not have respected the red lights posed by the French State.

It would be wrong, however, to leave them in the hands of the legal representatives of their victims because they are the barbarian leaders of countries that do not exist; or so little.

These supporters of the jihadists demand that the executioners escape their judges because they would have had the merits to face them and that they would be the victims.

2- The French debt
The jihadists are not only the victims of states and populations who have forced them to destroy cities millennia.

The French jihadists also went to Syria because they recognized the injustice they suffered in France.

It is for having experienced discrimination, relegation, apartheid, that they left where they could gather to live free and be respected as human beings and no longer animals as they are treated more than ever before who stayed.

The French are in accounts, in debt, late payment of compensation. The jihadists are also the bailiffs of the Sharia.

3- The fault bleaching
Certainly, among their supporters, no one asks that they come back to continue the fight. But no one asks that they stop him, let alone answer them.

It is simply asked that it be established by the French State that they do not come under the jurisdiction of the Levant alone competent for the fight that they conducted there.

They want them to return to France unscathed by any trial by local justice, any judicial qualification of their criminality, any execution of sentence pronounced.

4- The correspondence of the strategies

By most chance, this legal strategy corresponds exactly to the jihadist strategy.

They obtain in the name of the law, with the approval of the French State whose magistracy, three legal devices:

A- Immunity for the facts by:
a- The legal disqualification of the State from the place of exercise of the Caliphate and its judiciary,
b. The recognition of the French incapacity to judge their alleged crimes since no one can seriously investigate or qualify,
B- The legalization of the course strategy. (The right to the criminal path)
a- The Caliphate is not a local war. It's a world war.
b- By retaining the national law to judge a world course, the French State in fact endorses the strategy of the constitutive course of jihadism.

C- Complementarity
a- For the French State, the ghosts are French who abandon the criminal fight in the Levant.
b- For the jihadists and their supporters, the return is the legalization, the institutionalization, of the right to the global criminal course.

5- Insertion
By bringing them back so that they benefit from the judicial protection granted to any national, the French State inserts the jihadist strategy into French law.

While the jihadists only go to Syria to find the strength to return to destroy France, Europe, the French state refuses to install a judicial chain to judge the jihadists where they committed their most atrocious crime. , even the first crime.

He refuses to constitute a chain of justice because he breaks the chain of the crime.

He states that it is not continuous. He reserves to manipulate it, support it, justify it.

In doing so, he discusses the right of jihadists to destroy a particular state. He shares with them the concern to disqualify a particular state.

It recognizes their right to act wherever they please and to seek refuge in their country of nationality.

6- Inequality of rights

a- Random control
The ghosts will be judged only for minor French crimes and whose justification is not obvious.

It is indeed by no means right to pretend to impede the freedom of movement, information, association, idea and expression of these.

These are prohibitions that have the duration of the balance of power.

b- Permanent superiority
On the other hand, they will have come back by right in France.

They will have this right under the superiority recognized by the French State of their status as French in the jurisdictions of the countries in which their crimes are committed.

They will have caused the French State to deny the disqualification of these states, called "zones", and of the justices who bear their names.

7- The return guarantee of the continuity of the departure
This return, the protection against extradition thus offered to the ghost, the requirement to benefit from it when one is in the "zone" of action, distinguish the right to return from the abandonment of the combat.

The jihadists have neither to denounce, nor to deny, nor to give up, to assert their right to return.

In this way, the return formalizes a right to the continuity of the thought of departure.

The immediate problem for the French is not that this thought of departure is criminal. First, it aims to create a "return".

8- The civil consequences
The legalization of the "return" by the jurists thus accompanies the strategy of the return of the jihadists for two categories of people.

A- The ghosts
She accompanies him for the ghosts that the French justice makes leave of their crimes in the Levant and to which it can not pose conditions of abandonment of ideas and practices to justify their presence in France.

B- Accompanying persons
She also accompanies him for the support and accompaniment of jihadism.
a- The jihadists in title have not been tried for their crimes in the Levant.
b- There is no reason for them to be tried for the same crimes committed in France.
c- The suffering of the true Muslims is the same. This is the only universal principle that is worth it.

9- The delegation of power
Admittedly, crime is prohibited, as in the Levant, which is not a major obstacle for those who agree to lose life or freedom.

On the other hand, the criminal classification of the crime has been made debatable.

Informally, a jurisprudence, even a legality, of the legitimacy of the jihadist course, and thus of its legal bases drawn from Shari'a and political speeches, will have been installed in the practices of the French State.

When we know that the French state is unable to prohibit doctors from practicing in Burqa in Parisian hospital consultations, we can imagine what it can be of its influence on the most diverse activists.

The French are therefore asked to welcome as their own Fascist combatants, such recognized war criminals.

Moreover, this national protection must be assured to them not at the end of their war but in the course of it.

Return is the humanitarian corridor through which jihadists can move from one continent to another and continue to strike.

Returning, the jihadists are not only haloed. They acquire a delegation of power. QED.

5) - Bis repetita
The reasoning behind these support for the jihadists is well known to those familiar with the French public debate.

1- The form "movement"
The noisy mess of interests and interventions that muffle the voices of the people of the Levant and the victims of the Bataclan should not lead us to overshadow the action of a specific European sector of public implementation of graduates and city populations. They can become rural by transporting the city to the countryside.

This sector has occasionally played a vital role in Europe for decades.
a- The most famous form is that of "students of 68". Lately, she has embodied in "Catalan independence".
b- She is the maneuver in the claims of return of the jihadists.

It is not enough to say that she is not alone in erasing her leading activist role.

2- Mechanics
The old men of May 68 have the habit and the experience of this leftist logorrhea which functions with the imperative of the imprecation, the anathema, the curse, in order to impose Redemption.

Fifty years ago, it was absolutely necessary, immediately, to organize the Civil War to purify the society of the dictatorship of General de Gaulle and the Communists.

Fifty years later, the same socio-political groups are again trying to force the French to give their protection to adventurers who use the vocabulary of freedom and justice.

Today, as in the past, always in the name of moral urgency and law, the same sociopolitical currents require the French to save compatriots for the sole reason that they suffer and are in grave danger.

The French would lose their souls by appearing united with States full of blood.

b- They would save her by extending their protective hand over her lost children.
c- They would have a debt towards these fighters of which they refused to understand the fights and drifts of which they are guilty.
3- The reality
a- It does not matter that these people are worried about tracing the path of a fascist, slavery, destructive fight.
b- In law, it brings us back to colonialism, brings us into the Caliphate, imposes anarchism.
c- In practice, this solicitude is the useful imbecility that accompanies the construction of the global criminal path that is jihad.

6) – Conclusion
A government has many other circuits of reflection than the common reality and we will see what will happen.

Nevertheless, it is unthinkable that today French executives claim to organize the judicial policy of France around the archaism of the inequality of principle of magistrates and litigants.

Some magistratures would be unable to judge certain litigants.

It is this view publicly supported by jihadist lawyers that is stated by Mr. Moréas, police commissioner and lawyer:
"It is therefore the law of December 21, 2012, the first of the many anti-terrorism laws taken under the five-year term of François Hollande, which has driven the point: the French or French residents must be tried in France.
It is therefore up to the courts to request the extradition of these Frenchmen. It's that simple. "

What is simple and universal is the suppression of Privileges law on August 4, 1789.

1- The "foreign" courts are competent to try the criminals present on the ground where they have officiated.

2- On the other hand, the French courts do not have the right to judge the mentally ill. They have to hand them over to psychiatry.
a- The silence which is made at this moment establishes that the jihadists are not crazy.
b- They can always find who will be as usual the place of negotiations between organized criminals and the State.                                    


 Marc SALOMONE

Aucun commentaire: