Like enough, I confess, imagine stamping on the heel of our good President's announcement of some inconvenience. It does not take me much time, half a minute at most, but it allows me to start the day in a state of sweet bliss.
The reasons for disappointments no shortage currently the Head of State, as if everybody league for him to hurt.
Even senators, once so respectful, do not want to vote, even if only reluctantly, the proposed measures:
The Senate has imposed Thursday a setback to the government by refusing the extension of forfeiture of nationality some murderers of representatives of the authority of the state, a key measure of project on immigration, advocated by Nicolas Sarkozy.
By 182 votes against 156, the Senate rejected this provision announced, with a lot of bearing mechanical, Mr. Nicolas Sarkozy in a speech to great show pronounced safe last summer, in Grenoble.
It was intended that the deprivation of nationality to persons who have acquired French nationality since the age of 10 who have been convicted of a crime against persons in authority of the state. In the fall, Mr. Eric Besson had done better to introduce this measure in the bill "on immigration, integration and citizenship . "At first reading, the dedicated members had voted for, not too many souls. And the Law Committee of the Senate had, last week accepted principle, but has limited scope, the list of " custodians of public authority " being reduced to judges and law enforcement.
Senators have refused to introduce "the idea that 'There are two categories of French "and break" with all the criteria of equality of the Republic " without hesitation to mention explicitly the necessary references:
Nathalie Goulet spoke in a rather solemn centrist senators: " is the Vichy regime who invented the denaturalization! " she said in recounting how his family, to whom Petain regime withdrew French nationality in 1941, was among the first to be deported to Auschwitz.
yet we know that it was a wrong question. In the absence of Mr. Brice Hortefeux, the minister in charge of local government, Mr. Philippe Richert, who represented the government.
Obviously out of shape, he said softly:
"We're not inventing the deprivation of nationality, it already exists!"
And, implicitly, he recognized the futility of the measure, before his final argument Assen:
Stressing that the 90,000 people each year who acquire citizenship by naturalization, although few would be affected by the measure Mr. Richert argued he was not "illogical that when one of these people back, for murder, against the symbol of state authority, it can withdraw its nationality .
This appeal to logic is quite interesting.
Especially he was found in the reaction of the Minister of Interior and expelled outwards:
In a statement issued after the vote, Brice Hortefeux also felt that there was " nothing scandalous or shocking that the government, with the assent of the State Council "offers this." There is nothing more than to draw the logical consequences of a act which by its very nature, is the author outside the national community , "he added.
Admittedly has had to develop in the entourage intellectually fertile if the President of the Republic A design non-standard logic, which still eludes us part. For in the next over the proposals " logical" or not "illogical " our two ministers, one would arrive in good classical logic, to establish, in corollary, that of strain-born-of-strain in strain ad infinitum, as I am, would be entitled in law to murder, if the need arose, a judge or a policeman, his neighbor naturalized within the last ten years ... But I doubt
stronger than Mr. Hortefeux finds " nothing scandalous or shocking " in this proposal ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment