Re: [kraken] VERBOD RONDOM KRAKEN, DE STAND VAN ZAKEN

Auteur: decoy <decoy@lo-res.org>
Datum: 13 jun 2006 18:18 uur

jop kaal wrote:

>thanx martijn, iemand tijd en talent om dit te vertalen voor onze niet nederlandse medekrakers?
>
>
bij deze

Prohibition of Squatting, the state of things:

On Friday 9th of June, minister Dekker presented a plan to the house of
parliament
which shall make squatting as difficult as possible.
The parliament has demanded this from the minister at an earlier date by
official request.
De intention is to prohibit squatting completely. This plan does not
have the status of a legal
draft yet, therefore it is impossible to study the letter of the law yet.
It is to be expected, though, that the legal draft will soon be on the
table.
Furthermore, there are unsettling plans in development outside the area
of criminal law.

To read the complete text (in Dutch) of Dekker's presentation look it up
on krakenrotterdam.org
under the term "voorstel Dekker" under the topic "politics and policy".

The most important change relative to the current situation which
threatens to be implemented
by this legislation, is the adjustment of the article 429 subsection of
the criminal law.
That article says, that a house may not be occupied except if it had
been empty for a year.
Now this condition is supposed to be lifted, which makes squatting a
criminal offense at any time.

If there were a complete prohibition to come, then this does not
implicitly mean that the police will
always enforce that law in case of occupation of an empty building.
There are experts on legislation who claim that initiating an eviction
is actually not a competence of
law enforcement, but has to be called for by court order as part of a
civil procedure. This already applies
now in case one gets caught red-handed at the time of breaking the door
to access a building.
Even now it is police practice to evict houses without consulting a
judge, for example if they do not believe that a house was empty for a
year already.

One can expect, that a squatting prohibition will put the police in the
self-assumed position that they can evict
on their own initiative. (although with a warrant for trespassing issued
by a state prosecutor).
Looking at this from the current legal position of squatters, this is of
course completely worthless.

(trouwens, ik snap niet echt wat deze bovenstaande zin in de context wil
zeggen. misschien kan martijn dat nog toelichten en in de vertaling ook
verwerken):

As a short term remedy, one can wait and hope that there wont be any
action following an occupation.
The state prosecutor shall not always initiate procedures. Regarding
this, a special set of regulations
has to be implemented into the law. One of those is supposed to be, that
the owner is expected to
have taken steps to actually make proper use of the building in
question. The proposed plan seems to
indicate, that housing anti squatters could already constitute proper use.
With this, the minister proves how twisted her concept of proper use is:
Four people living in a house
where hundreds could live? Long live the prevention of emptiness!

Even if squatting is going to be prohibited, it shall continue
nevertheless.
At the end of the day, a rather mild prosecution regime is better than a
very strict one.
If the respective regulations for prosecution are made public, one can
appeal to them as citizen.
That is actually not general courtroom practice and could lead to a very
weak position for the
accused in a criminal case, even if the prosecution itself might be
completely senseless.

Up to a certain degree, one is left with second-guessing intentions at
this time.
General practice, however, is, to elaborate on the upcoming legal draft
while it is being formulated.
It remains as a fact, though, that this legislation wants to damage
alternative infrastructure, just before
this right-wing cabinet, which wants to follow the American example so
much, has come to the end of it's term.
Time for action!

-- 
decoy
mimeographic designer
memecraft.org
get my gpg key: gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.nl.pgp.net --recv-keys B1E95FAD
key fingerprint: D557 EA54 BEFB 2A13 606A  327E 0CAE 5D73 B1E9 5FAD
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Indeed, we believe in the proverbial 'rough consensus and running code'
Still, we sometimes run out of consensus and end up with rough code
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--------------------------------------------------------------
 Afmelden, e-mail: kraken-post-unsubscribe@dvxs.nl
 Opnieuw aanmelden: kraken-post-subscribe@dvxs.nl
 Faq: kraken-post-faq@dvxs.nl 
 Website: http://www.krakenpost.nl
 [13 Jun 18:00u]: 260 abonnees + 379 niet-abonnees
--------------------------------------------------------------
 

ontvangsttijd Tue Jun 13 16:18:40 2006