Municipal elections in Molenbeek: do you need a clean criminal record to become an alderman? “We create civil death mechanisms”

The decision has just been made, Emir Kir will not appeal: we will indeed have to vote again in Saint-Josse

More than twenty years ago

The Last Hour indicated Wednesday that the municipal councilor had been sentenced by the courts twice more than twenty years ago: in March 2001, to 4 years in prison, 2 of which were suspended, for rape of a minor over 16 years old at the time of the facts and in 1998, 10 months suspended, for theft, using break-in, climbing or false keys.

In a joint statement, Mr. Akki said he would stay “deeply convinced of the progressive project of the new majority to improve the lives of residents”, but chooses to take a step aside so as not to harm the establishment of the majority, “in the sole interest of Molenbeekois and my voters”.

The PS indicated that the party authorities would meet quickly to appoint a socialist alderman to complete the municipal college team.

According to Day DHYassine Akki will remain municipal councilor. This withdrawal will therefore have no impact on the political balance in Molenbeek since its 820 preference votes remain in the socialist basket. The PS-PTB majority is therefore not weakened by these changes.

What does the law say?

From a legal point of view, should the elected socialist renounce this position of alderman because of his judicial past? For the constitutionalist Marc Uyttendaele (ULB), who specifies that he is not aware of Mr. Akki’s case, the answer is clearly negative.

“The courts can strip you of your civil and political rights and then you can no longer exercise political or elective mandates, or even run for office. Here, there was no longer any ban on him being an alderman “estimates Professor Uyttendaele, who recalls that before an election, we check the rights of the candidates. “This is an eligibility condition. As part of the list validation process, we check whether the candidates have not been deprived of their civil and political rights.”

“Not healthy”

With this decision, comments Marc Uyttendaele, “we are in pure politics.” “And it is a terrible message to say that someone ultimately does not have the right to reclassification. This man was convicted. He served his sentence. He was banned. All that is lifted. I tend to consider that we must be content with court decisions and not do justice beyond justice, especially for facts that date back to Methuselah. If we apply jurisdictional decisions beyond their scope itself, we create mechanisms of civil death. It’s not healthy.” (With Belga)