There will be no irresponsibility if the temporary abolition of the discernment results from the close and voluntary consumption of psychotropic people for the purpose of committing an offense.
Le Monde
It was the wish issued in April by Emmanuel Macron, after the viva emotion in the absence of trial in the Sarah Halimi case, a Jewish sexagenarian killed in 2017 by a big consumer of cannabis in a ” Deniring puff “. Thursday, December 16, the Parliament has definitely adopted, by a last vote of the Senate, the delicate reform of the criminal irresponsibility regime.
Adopted by hand lifting without the voices of the left, the bill provides for two exceptions to criminal irresponsibility, which require strict conditions probably difficult to bring together. The first has no connection with the Halimi case: there will be no irresponsibility if the temporary abolition of discernment results from the close and voluntary consumption of psychotropic people for the purpose of committing an offense. This exception is intended to apply for example to terrorists who are doing just before their passage to the act. As desired by senators, in cases where there is hesitation between abolition or alteration of discernment, because of contradictory psychiatric expertise, then the competent jurisdiction will decide in camera on liability or irresponsibility, before the judgment of the case if applicable.
The second exception has a direct link with the Halimi case: it will be possible to suppress the consumption of psychoactive products, such as drugs or alcohol, if the person knew that it could lead to the violence or homicide of which it has been declared irresponsible. Thus “it is not a question of suppressing the act committed, but the voluntary absorption of psychotropic”, summarizes the custody of the seals and former lawyer.
“Right of the victims” for the right
“The right of the victims will be respected, that’s what they expected,” said Senator Nathalie Goulet (Centrist Union), who had made in May by the Senate his own bill on the subject.
MPs and senators have reached a compromise on the government project, which was far from won both the desired developments on the irresponsibility diverged.
During the ultimate vote on the Palais-Bourbon, the rapporteur Naïma Moutchou (LRM) welcomed this “final” agreement on “a subject that deeply moved the nation”. In addition to the majority, the right also supported the bill, which “brings a criminal response”. “The civil parties and our fellow citizens have a hard time understanding that there is no trial and that everything stops abruptly once the declared irresponsibility”, “says the member Pascal Brinder (UDI).
Conversely, the left was against this bill and will file appeals before the Constitutional Council. MP Ugo Bernalicis (France unsuitably) criticizes a “circumstance law” that can produce “a sprain with the principle of criminal irresponsibility”. “The text does not provide warranties with respect to the permanence of care that the mental state of the person declared irresponsible”, reports Lamia El Aaaraje (Socialist Party).