Articles

Settlement in criminal proceedings partially annulled

Settlement in criminal proceedings partially annulled

Settlement in criminal proceedings partially annulled

07.06.2016 BE law

Last Thursday (June 2nd) an important decision of the Belgian Constitutional Court partially annulled article 216bis § 2 of the Code of criminal procedure with regard to the settlement and the resulting end of criminal proceedings. The Court stated that article 216bis § 2 violates a set of fundamental rights, including the right to a fair trial and the principle of judicial independence.

Also available in Dutch and in French

The Constitutional Court received four prejudicial questions that were posed by the Chamber of Indictment of the Court of Appeal of Gent in a case regarding suspicious financial transactions. The defendant stated himself being discriminated by the Public Prosecutor, who in application of the articles 216bis and 216ter of the Code of criminal procedure could decide whether or not to grant a settlement, even after criminal proceedings were started and without any judicial verification of the decision’s justification.

The decision of the Constitutional Court stated that §2 of article 216bis violates articles 10 and 11 of the Belgian Constitution, combined with the right to a fair trial and the principle of judicial independence as stated by article 151 of the Constitution, article 6.1 of the European Convention of Human Rights and article 14,1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as far as it grants the public prosecutor the power to end criminal proceedings that were already initiated or that were already pending before the Courts, by means of settlement, without any actual judicial verification.

The Constitutional Court does not criticize the fact that the Public Prosecutor has the possibility to settle a case that has already been initiated or is already pending before the Courts, but questions arise with the lack of substantive judicial verification. The fact that a judge merely has to verify whether all formal conditions for a settlement are satisfied, is, according to the Constitutional Court, not sufficient. According to the Constitutional Court the judge should be able to properly verify the settlement concluded by the Public Prosecutor, including the proportionality and the opportunity of such settlement.

The annulment of article 216bis §2 will not have any influence on settlements concluded and validated in the past: the decision will not change anything in cases where the settlement has already lead to closure of the criminal proceedings. The Constitutional Court states that the article will remain valid until the decision has been published in the Belgian Official Journal, which could take a few weeks. After the decision has been published, it will be up to Minister of Justice Koen Geens to amend the article and to extend the judicial verification during settlement proceedings.

Constitutional Court - Decision 2016/83 (French version / Dutch version)

Team

Related news

26.09.2018 BE law
Eerlijke marktpraktijken, slechtmaking en de vrijheid van meningsuiting

Articles - Op 1 maart 2018, oordeelde het hof van beroep te Brussel[1] dat een aan derden verzonden e-mailbericht waarin werd meegedeeld dat alle samenwerking met de betrokken partij was beëindigd op grond van het feit dat de door deze laatste geleverde diensten waren bekritiseerd wegens hun slechte kwaliteit, en dit terwijl er hieromtrent een procedure hangende is, een daad van slechtmaking is, verboden door artikel VI.104 WER. Hetzelfde geldt voor een e-mailbericht aan derden, waarin een bepaalde persoon wordt afgedaan als een “individu zonder scrupules”.

Read more

26.09.2018 BE law
Pratiques honnêtes du marché, dénigrement et la liberté d’expression

Articles - Par jugement du 1er mars 2018, la cour d’appel de Bruxelles[1] a déclaré qu’un courriel adressé à des tiers, indiquant qu’il aurait été mis fin à toute collaboration avec la partie en cause au motif que les prestations fournies par celle-ci auraient été critiquées en raison de leur piètre qualité alors qu’une procédure est pendante à cet égard, constitue un acte de dénigrement interdit au sens de l’article VI.104. du CDE. Il en est de même d’un courriel adressé à des tiers, indiquant qu’une personne identifiée est un «  individu sans scrupules ».

Read more

Our website uses cookies: third party analytics cookies to best adapt our website to your needs & cookies to enable social media functionalities. For more information on the use of cookies, please check our Privacy and Cookie Policy. Please note that you can change your cookie opt-ins at any time via your browser settings.

Privacy – en cookieverklaring