Search

band annie's Weblog

I have a parallel blog in French at http://anniebannie.net

Category

Belgium

Belgian ministry of justice and prison service under fire for arbitrary refusal


On 16 March 2010, the Brussels Conseil d’Etat issued an urgent injunction stopping the ministry of justice and the prison service from giving effect to their decision of 24 February 2010 denying prison teacher Luk Vervaet access to Belgian prisons for ‘reasons of national security’. The injunction was the latest move in Vervaet’s battle for fair treatment from the Belgian authorities, which has so far resulted in two court rulings in his favour.

Ban on prison teaching unreasoned
Vervaet has taught Dutch to prisoners in Belgian prisons since 2004, when he received authorisation from the ministries and was employed by ADEPPI, an association which organises educational courses for prisoners. In all that time he has never had complaints about his conduct. But on 10 August 2009 he was summarily denied access to St Gilles prison when he tried to enter for a teaching session. Then on 17 August, his employer received a letter from the prisons directorate saying that his access to prisons was denied for reasons of national security. No further reasons were specified and no opportunity to appeal was given.

A campaign was launched to demand justice for Vervaet. Campaigners argued that Vervaet was being penalised for his campaigning work on conditions in Belgian prisons, on which he has published many articles, and his demands for fair treatment for terrorism suspects. The Platform for Free Expression organised a petition which has been signed by over 1000 people, including prominent academics, civil society activists, unionists and others.

At the same time, a legal challenge was issued. Although it was rejected at first instance, the Brussels Appeal Court reversed the lower court’s ruling in a landmark judgment on 27 January 2010, and held that Vervaet’s right to fair treatment could not be overridden by ‘reasons of State’. The judges said that rights which were ‘indispensable for the exercise of his livelihood’ included the right to be told the reasons for the decision to bar him, and the right to a hearing to answer the allegations. The court affirmed that Vervaet’s conduct in performing his teaching duties had been irreproachable, and that the decision of the Ministry of Justice to deny him access to prisons was arbitrary and unreasoned. ‘The rule of law does not stop at the prison gates’, it said.

Second refusal in identical terms
Following the court’s judgment, Vervaet’s employer re-applied for him to resume his prison teaching. By letter of 24 February 2010, the ministry of Justice and the prison service once again refused authorisation for Vervaet to enter a prison. The new decision from the justice ministry and prison service repeated word for word the initial decision: ‘authorisation is refused for reasons of security’. In response, on 8 March Vervaet’s lawyers sought an urgent stay on the decision to refuse access to penal establishments. Their challenge was heard on 11 March in the Conseil d’Etat.

Opposing the injunction, lawyers for the ministry cynically argued that Vervaet’s complaint was inadmissible as the teacher did not have ‘a legal interest’ to protect, since his employer had served notice to terminate his employment contract after the first prison ban. But on 16 March, the court rejected the ministry’s objections and issued an urgent injunction preventing the ministry from implementing the new work ban. It reiterated that the licence to enter prisons could only be removed for good reason, and that neither Vervaet nor the court had been provided with the ministry’s reasons. He should have been given the opportunity to be heard before a decision was taken which prevented him from exercising his profession. The workplace ban created ‘serious and continuing prejudice’, the court said, which justified an urgent injunction.

Censorship

Meanwhile, the posting of an article written by Vervaet on the website of minister Eveyln Huytenbroek was attacked by senator Alain Destexhe, who demanded its immediate removal. The senator accepted that the content of the piece, on prison education, was uncontentious, but claimed that its author was ‘close to radical Islam’ and ‘supports attacks on civilians’. Destexhe alleged that Vervaet had an ‘ambiguous’ relationship with Nizar Trabelsi, a Tunisian former professional footballer convicted in 2004 for plotting to attack Kleine Brogel, a NATO airbase. He pointed to Vervaet’s former membership of the Belgian Workers’ Party and his role as Belgian representative of a parliamentary support group for Palestine which, he said, supported all forms of struggle against Israel. Destexhe also pointed to Vervaet’s opposition to Trabelsi’s extradition. Destexhe expressed concern that ‘an ideologue of the calibre of Luk Vervaet should be given the opportunity to get material published on the official website of the ministry for the French community’, and questioned the minister’s links with him. In response, the ministry was quick to dissociate itself from Vervaet, who it said was not known personally but whose article had been taken from a League of Human Rights website. The offending article was immediately taken down from the minister’s website. Vervaet said that he would be consulting his lawyers about an action for defamation against senator Destexhe.

Prison teacher victim of new McCarthyism in Belgium

By IRR European News Team
LucVervaet

The Platform for Free Expression in Belgium is demanding to know why a language teacher at Saint-Gilles prison in Brussels, who has spoken out against anti-terror laws and the demonisation of Muslims, has been banned from prisons on security grounds.

Four university professors have launched a petition to support 57-year-old Luk Vervaet who, on 10 August, was informed by phone by administrators at the prison of Saint-Gilles that he no longer had access to the prison where he had taught Dutch to prisoners for over five years. No reason was given, except that the decision ‘didn’t come from them’ but from ‘above’.

A week later, on 17 August, his employer, the association which organises the courses in prison, received a letter from the General Director of the Belgian Prison Service, Hans Meurisse, saying that Luk Vervaet was forbidden for ‘security reasons’ from access to all Belgian penitentiary institutions.

Secret evidence

During Vervaet’s five years of teaching in prisons, there has never been a complaint by the prison authorities about his work, nor has he ever been accused of breaching security. On the contrary, his relations with the prison governor, the prison guards and the student prisoners were all good. Luk has no right to know the basis of the ban, nor can he defend himself, despite the fact that he will be forced to quit his job and lose his livelihood.

A financial appeal has been launched to help Luk Vervaet fund a judicial review of the state’s action, which supporters see as a modern-day version of McCarthyism.

It looks as though those who campaign against anti-terror laws and racism could be hounded out of public service, in much the same way as Communists were dismissed in the US, as well as in Germany under the Berufsverbot decree. (There were also similar measures against Communists and left-wing sympathisers in Switzerland until the 1990s).[1]

Vervaet’s lawyer, Olivia Venet, has made an application for the release of his administrative file, as in Belgium, the state keeps a file on all workers in any kind of public service.[2]

She has received an answer familiar to UK campaigners against anti-terror laws. While the state agreed to release the file, pages 1-3 would have to be removed on national security grounds. Secret evidence is now being used against an individual – this time not a Muslim terror suspect but a Belgian citizen who happens to teach in prisons.

The truth about Belgian prisons

Belgium prisons are so medieval, overcrowded and unhygienic that international bodies such as the Council of Europe Anti-Torture Committee (CPT) have repeatedly denounced conditions, drawing attention to the growing number of suicide-attempts (particularly amongst juveniles).

Belgians of a migrant background (mainly Moroccans and Turks) are also heavily over-represented in prisons. Luk Vervaet had attempted to draw attention to racism and the social crisis in prisons through writing occasional columns in national newspapers like La Libre, Le Soir, De Standaard and De Morgen.

He has also collaborated with academic research into prison conditions, high suicide rates, proposals to build ‘Titan’ prisons as well as the general demonisation, and criminalisation of young people from migrant backgrounds. He had also been active in several campaigns against the Belgian anti-terror laws, speaking out against the deportation of terror suspects to countries such as Morocco and the US that practise torture and/or the death penalty.

His was also one of the few voices in Belgium prepared to argue that the proposed extradition to the United States of ex-footballer Nisar Trabelsi comprised a form of double punishment, as he is already serving a ten-year prison sentence in Belgium for a terrorist offence. What is particularly strange is that in 2009 the Belgian prison authorities granted Vervaet permission to visit Trabelsi in Lantin prison and no objections were raised.

During his visits, Luk had been helping Trabelsi write a book and an appeal against his proposed extradition.

Defending human rights – a threat

‘Do his troubling questions and his numerous public declarations about the intolerable situation in Belgian prisons pose a security risk?’ ask the four university professors, whose petition has now been signed by an impressive array of supporters, from Socialist and Green parliamentarians, to artists, film-makers, musicians, journalists to academics working in the field of criminology, anthropology and medicine.

Luk Vervaet, they argue, is nothing more than ‘a human rights activist for detained persons … Apparently today, someone who maintains contacts with or defends the fundamental rights of persons suspected of terrorism, becomes a suspect himself.’

__________________
[1] In 1950, a decree made loyalty to the German Constitution a condition for public service employment; by 1978, the Berufsverbot decree had banned communists from employment in government service.

[2] In 1990, in the face of mass campaigning which involved 350,000 people applying for access to their personal files, the full facts of the Swiss states’ Cold War information-gathering and surveillance of Communists or left-wing sympathisers as well as foreign residents became known. Many of those who successfully applied for the release of their files finally understood the reasons why their professional careers had faltered for apparently inexplicable reasons. In 1991, as a result of the protests and the call for a parliamentary commission into the surveillance scandal, the Committee ‘No State Snooping in Switzerland; (Schweiz ohne Schnüffelstaat) was formed. It still exists today.

The Institute of Race Relations is precluded from expressing a corporate view: any opinions expressed are therefore those of the authors.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑