Souad Razzouk (PS) : « La réglementation sur la burqa est carnavalesque »
« Le règlement de police n’est pas vraiment très clair à propos du port de la burqa à Bruxelles. On peut y lire ‘qu’il est interdit de dissimuler le visage ou de se trouver déguisé, grimé ou travesti sur la voie publique ou dans les lieux accessibles aux public, sauf autorisation le port du masque est interdit‘. D’abord, la burqa n’est pas un masque mais un habit traditionnel porté en Afghanistan et ensuite, le texte laisse croire qu’il suffit de demander une autorisation pour pouvoir porter la burqa« , explique Souad Razzouk (PS, ex-FDF) qui a introduit une interpellation à ce sujet au Conseil communal de Bruxelles-Ville. L’information a été relatée par l’hebdo flamand Brussel Deze Week (03/04/09).
« Je pense qu’il faut revoir l’article du règlement de police à propos de la burqa car l’interdiction n’est pas appliquée de la même manière dans les 19 communes de Bruxelles. Les fonctionnaires chargés de l’application des sanctions administratives dans les communes de Watermael-Boitsfort, Uccle, Woluwé-Saint-Pierre et Forest ont explicitement déclaré que le port de la burqa ne pouvait tomber sur le coup de l’article sur le déguisement. Faut-il en déduire que la burqa est tolérée dans ces 4 communes ? Le message est donc ambigu, il faut une clarification juridique. Il convient d’harmoniser les choses à l’ensemble des 19 communes bruxelloises et dire clairement que chez nous, en Europe, il est important qu’on puisse reconnaître les personnes. C’est une question de sécurité publique telle que stipulée par l’article 9 de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme. Il me semble que si peu de Bruxellois sont concernés, des touristes venant de pays différents où la burqa est tolérée (ou même traditionelle) se trouvent confrontés à l’incompréhension et la non connaissance de notre règlement. Doivent-ils dès lors demander préalablement à leurs séjours une autorisation de porter le masque ?« , s’interroge la députée socialiste.
Réagissant à l’interpellation, Freddy Thielemans, le bourgmestre socialiste de la Ville de Bruxelles, ne partage pas l’avis de sa colistière. « Le seul qui m’a demandé des informations à propos de cette interdiction de burqa est l’ambassadeur du Qatar. Si je vais au Qatar, je suis obligé de respecter les lois du Qatar, si les gens du Qatar viennent chez nous, ils doivent respecter nos lois« , a précisé Freddy Thielemans.
Se définissant comme une « musulmane, ce qui veut dire littéralement “soumise à Dieu”, réformatrice, croyante, non pratiquante. De confession islamiste avec un fort penchant pour l’émancipation de la femme« , Souad Razzouk n’a pas vraiment tort sur le plan juridique.
D’après les règlements de police actuellement en vigueur en région bruxelloise, le port de la burqa est toléré pendant la période du carnaval et n’est pas sanctionné de la même manière dans les 19 communes. En dehors du carnaval, il est également possible d’introduire une demande d’autorisation à manifester en burqa auprès des autorités communales. Une circulaire fédérale datant du 02/02/93 précise cependant que toute personne doit être toujours reconnaissable en public. En mai 2008, une étude de Brussels Studies avait révélé que 33 procès-verbaux avaient été dressés en région bruxelloise pour port illégal de la burqa. Le député MR, François-Xavier De Donnéa, avait introduit le 21/02/05 une proposition de loi « en vue d’interdire à toute personne de circuler sur la voie publique et/ou dans les lieux publics le visage masqué, déguisé ou dissimulé » mais sa proposition n’a pas recueilli la majorité au Parlement fédéral.
« Le bon critère doit être de pouvoir reconnaître une personne sur la voie publique car il m’est déjà arrivé de voir à Molenbeek ou ailleurs des femmes qui ne portaient pas la burqa mais qui étaient totalement couvertes à l’exception des yeux. Elles portaient un tout petit foulard qui masquaient les lèvres. Cela fait peur à voir car on n’est même pas sûr qu’il s’agit bien de femmes« , conclut Souad Razzouk.
Par ailleurs, en exclusivité sur Parlemento, voici la liste complète des candidats PS pour les élections régionales du 7 juin 2009.
Effectifs | |||||||
1 | Charles PICQUE | 24 | Anne BROTCHE | 47 | Mounir LAARISSI | 70 | Ahmed El Ktibi Mohamed OURIAGHLI |
2 | Françoise DUPUIS | 25 | Mohammed AZZOUZI | 48 | Isabelle FONTAINE | 71 | Karine LALIEUX |
3 | Emir KIR | 26 | Chantal DE SAEGER | 49 | Jean SPINETTE | 72 | Freddy THIELEMANS |
4 | Caroline DESIR | 27 | Henri Simons Ahmed EL KTIBI | 50 | Martine BARBE | ||
5 | Rudi VERVOORT | 28 | Souad RAZZOUK | 51 | Ahmed LAAOUEJ | ||
6 | Eric TOMAS | 29 | Emin OZKARA | 52 | Ariane HERMAN | Suppléants | |
7 | Fadila LAANAN | 30 | Nicole BOMELE NKETO | 53 | Pierre KOMPANY | 1 | Alain HUTCHINSON |
8 | Mohammed DAIF | 31 | Carlo LUYCKX | 54 | Myriem AMRANI | 2 | Anne-Sylvie MOUZON |
9 | Michèle CARTHE | 32 | Anne SWAELENS | 55 | Ibrahim DONMEZ | 3 | Olivia P’TITO |
10 | Sfia BOUARFA | 33 | Michel MOOCK | 56 | Anastasia PAPADOPOULOS | 4 | Mohammadi CHAHID |
11 | Philippe CLOSE | 34 | Bernadette GENNOTTE | 57 | Ahmed OUARTASSI | 5 | Catherine MOUREAUX |
12 | Julie FISZMAN | 35 | Abdallah BOUSTANI | 58 | Anne-Françoise MARTENS | 6 | Christian MAGERUS |
13 | Rachid MADRANE | 36 | Pascale SCHEERS | 59 | Amet GJANAJ | 7 | Karim CHETIOUI |
14 | Isabelle EMMERY | 37 | Yonnec POLET | 60 | Catherine WERTS | 8 | Aline KAHN |
15 | Willy DECOURTY | 38 | Renée CHRISTOFFEL-DE VOS | 61 | Hava ARDICLIK | 9 | Pierre LARDOT |
16 | Véronique JAMOULLE | 39 | Gérald MOEREMANS | 62 | Paulette PICQUARD | 10 | France MARAGE |
17 | Grégor CHAPELLE | 40 | Laetitia KALIMBIRIRO NSIMIRE | 63 | Abobakre BOUJHAR | 11 | Sevket TEMIZ |
18 | Cathy MARCUS | 41 | Guy WILMART Fabrizio BUCELLA | 64 | Clara QUARESMINI | 12 | Henri SIMONS Sonia LHOEST |
19 | Jamal IKAZBAN | 42 | Yasmina NEKHOUL | 65 | Mado MFUNI LUKANDA | 13 | Christine ROUFFIN |
20 | Fatiha SAIDI | 43 | Mohammed ERRAZI | 66 | Thierrey VAN CAMPENHOUT | 14 | Josette DUCHAINE |
21 | Jean-Pierre VAN GORP | 44 | Florence LEPOIVRE | 67 | Talbia BELHOUARI | 15 | Henri SIMONS |
22 | Nadia EL YOUSFI | 45 | Mohammed LAHLALI | 68 | Julien UYTTENDAELE | 16 | Alain LEDUC |
23 | Béa DIALLO | 46 | Sigrid JOURDAIN | 69 | Jean DEMANNEZ |
15 Réponses
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
Le PS n’est pas à contradiction près, je rappelle qu’à Schaerbeek, la ministre de la Justice, L. Onkelinx n’avait pas hésité à afficher, sur la liste électorale qu’elle mena, un représentant du parti turc d’extrème droite, pour ne pas dire fasciste!!!
Égalité
07/04/2009 at 8:30
Pour tordre sans doute n’a-t-elle pas tord.
Pour peut être avoir raison, elle ne devrait pas avoir tout à fait tort…
Ø
07/04/2009 at 9:07
J’avais tort parce que je m’endors, j’ai corrigé et j’en suis pas mort. Merci !
Mehmet Koksal
07/04/2009 at 9:16
Faudrait peut être vous intéresser à des Politiques qui ne vous « endorment » pas alors ! La spécialiste de la danse des 7 voiles semble s’en tirer sans égratignures !!!
Je vous ai lu plus incisif cher chroniqueur ;-)
Tarkan
08/04/2009 at 8:08
Souad, tu ne peux être à la fois non pratiquante, et soumise à Dieu.
Dis nous exactement ce que tu pratiques? Ca m’intéresse……….
LeJusticierMasqué
28/04/2009 at 7:05
Il est utile de rappeler les principes républicains :
8 BRUMAIRE an 2 (29 octobre 1793)
Décret relatif aux vêtemens des personnes des deux sexes (L. 16, 346 ; B. 36, 83.)
Art. 1er. Nulle personne de l’un et de l’autre sexe ne pourra contraindre aucun citoyen ni citoyenne à se vêtir d’une manière particulière sous peine d être considérée et traitée comme suspecte et poursuivie comme perturbateur du repos public. Chacun est libre de porter tel vêtement et ajustement de son sexe que bon lui semble.
Art. 2. La Convention nationale n’entend point déroger aux précédens décrets rendus sur le fait de la cocarde nationale, sur le costume des prêtres et sur les travestissemens ainsi qu’à tous autres décrets relatifs au même objet.
Art. 3. Le présent décret sera inséré dans le Bulletin du 9 brumaire.
Source : Collection complète des lois, décrets, ordonnances, règlemens avis du Conseil d’état
Monde en Question
27/06/2009 at 6:49
A quoi sert ce site , j’ai envoyé mon avis ainsi qu’une réponse à « monde en question » et vous m’avez tout simplement effacé ! C’est ça votre conception de la liberté d’expression ? ou une certaine vérité vous déranges!! Vous êtes bien des socialistes , on reconnait de suite votre griffe …..
jean pierre demol
06/07/2009 at 8:03
deuxième tentative de réponse à « monde en question ».
D’abord nous sommes en 2009 et non en 1793. Ensuite , vous faites référence à des principes républicains qui
non pas de raisons d’être ici . Ensuite encore ,il y a une différence entre la liberté de porter un vêtement et de se cacher une partie du visage en signe de soumission à une religion , nos lois autorisent à se cacher le visage uniquement au carnaval et si ces gens obéissent à leurs lois , ils doivent aussi obéir à celles du pays qui les accueilles .
Vive le roi , à bas la république !
jean pierre demol
07/07/2009 at 1:30
au dictionnaire:
MASQUE1, subst. masc.
b) Pièce d’étoffe recouvrant la totalité ou la partie supérieure du visage que l’on porte pour se dissimuler.
Donc la burga est un masque et entre bien dans la cardre du réglement de police.
Perplexe
11/12/2009 at 1:56
quand on vient dans un pays européen,la moindre des choses,c’est d’adopter les moeurs de ce pays.tolérerait-t-on qu’un Papou déambule tout nu dans les rues d’une ville française? Si des femmes veulent porter la burqa qu’elles retournent ou aillent(pour les converties)dans les pays où la burqa est courante.L »Europe doit conserver son aspect et ses traditions !
Henri Roques
17/12/2009 at 5:09
La moindre des choses quand on vient dans un pays des Amériques (d’Afrique ou d’Asie) est d’adopter les mœurs de ce pays…
Or les colonisateurs ont imposé leurs mœurs par la force.
«Les naturels [Haïti] sont propres ç être commandés et à ce qu’on les fasse travailler, semer et mener tous autres travaux qui seraient nécessaires [esclavage], à ce qu’on leur enseigne à aller vêtus et à prendre nos coutumes».
Christophe Colomb, La découverte de l’Amérique, La Découverte, 1979-2006.
Monde en Question
17/12/2009 at 5:26
@Monde en Question
Ca me fait bien rigoler les gens comme toi qui retournent 400 ans en arriere…
Anthony
25/01/2010 at 6:23
Rigolez bien aussi de votre erreur de calcul : 2010 – 1492 = 518 ans et non 400 ans…
Monde en Question
26/01/2010 at 7:28
The
hypocrisy and feminist manipulation in the society
(Some
philosophical thesis)
Currently, we took knowledge of the feminist deputies in the
European parliament that want to manipulate the merit and equality against men,
especially whit the Sweden
feminist presidency of Europe and many influences in the council of Europe .
is intellectual manipulation and violence form the feminist deputies
that want to put women in power, just because they are women, even without
having the status, merit, knowledge’s, social status, impartiality of gender
ideologies specially feminist (that the majority of women in not), economic and
scientific status and Further factors of psychological profile and intellectual
and ethic profile .
If feminist in politics and society always assault men to coerce
their rights and liberties, merits and power, and always try to put women
superior to men, discriminating them positively without give and be humanist
and give the same rights for equality and positive discrimination for men,
specially in those issues that men is losing and affect.
Currently, men cannot live whit women, cannot establish
relationships and it would increase the feminist hypocrisy whit the time, if is
not blamed, arrested, accused those criminal feminist that manipulates traffic
of influences, discrimination against men and positive discrimination to women.
They are going against the constitutionality, human right and
humanism, and also against the nature and naturals laws of evolutionism.
Please block and lawsuit those feminist, coerce the political
access, even if they are not radicals, androphobic’s, psychotics, obsessive
lesbians that usually are radical feminists.
The feminism demands justice and equality but is just for women not
for men, when men is victim or accused is not under the same treatment and law
as a female, because feminism is hypocrisy and puts in reality equality as
superiority and justice as exclusive for women but not for men, when for men
they are less defended and victims as women.
The feminist crimes or considered but feminist stereotypes as
mainstreaming against men, to make serious the crimes and discriminate them to
benefit women but discriminate negatively men, exploiting men juridical and
hypocritally and coercing men of the same rights to benefit. As you can see,
many feminists crimes are consider and judge as a homicide or more than
mutilation, that is unfair and instigating to make worst crimes as multiple
homicides as terrorism and mutilations specially to coerce the expression and
sensitivity organs.
Men is constantly discriminated in health, specially is it is
illness that is by mainstreaming or exclusively against men, justice and family
justice, politics, aesthetics and well-being, dressing and dress freedom,
liberty of opinion against feminism and philosophical arguments, without
mention that they are conformist to feminism and manipulated by them that they
don’t even find the true arguments to defend themselves.
As for example many thing are devised and created by men, those
thing have many commanding and as sex dignity should be men commanding
otherwise if it is not men should have the same treatment to control the things
that are controlled by women, women in nature had a traditional and biological
sexually determinants to the pregnancy and child care, however men is stilling
discriminated, nowadays to have the children when divorce or others rights as
traditionally were for women, so for women have all the rights but not for men,
meanwhile you should se that is difficult to have all the things, or is one
things or another, but not for women and feminism.
Whit the intellectualization of women they become selfish, envies,
to have the work, position and many men’s stuffs in society, specially the best
ones, however the civil construction work they don’t want to do it and let that
for men, reason that many men become sick, don’t develop their brain, become
criminally, toxically dependents even by alcohol and tobacco, become stressed,
psychotics and whit bad nutrition.
Whit the women feminist discrimination against men as by negligence
and ignorance especially in health men become sick and whit the illness will
behave criminally or whit indignity, even the justice if it is corrupted for
feminism it would be better make justice by themselves and kill the female
enemies that are screwing their lives. The ideology is the follow or is me or
you, who die.
The men and women should live together as by nature but whit the
artificialism even toxics that affects the sexual hormones , neurological
systems as brains and many systems because to live better all the body systems
should be better to live in harmony whit behave stability and whit that
establish rational and balanced relationships whit women.
Many feminist men are incoherent whit themselves and their rights
and they are making their death sentence even if they are ruining the rights of
many men until arrive them but however they are protected by the feminist main
female actors.
The feminism is manipulating and coercing the state of right,
coercing fundamental rights from men, coercing the principle of contradictory,
ideological-sexual impartially, sexual ethic whit other opposing sex, coercing
the philosophical principles of dialogue and opposing philosophies against the
feminism, coercing the liberty and right of conscience and opposition and
resistance against the feminism.
Even in court and political parliament men is coerced and
manipulated by feminist jurists that are hypocrite to the state of right of
equal and unisexual and humanist justice.
It probably will arrive a time that men to have rights, freedom,
warranties and privileges would have to change their sex, because feminism is
pretty much worst in reality by medium and long time than machismo, that is
naturalist, simples and privileges women in many stuff as privileges men in
others.
Men subjected by the intellectual and psychological violence form
feminism and women in the discrimination, female victimization and hypocrisy,
female demagogy, united nations hypocrisy and feminism, political feminist
organizations, feminist right organizations, non-governmental organizations
that affect and manipulate women and men to become feminist and discriminate
their selves as men as weaker , inferior, evils and illness, even many those
effects are causing directly or directly by the feminist and their side
effects.
The feminism is wining in the society because is very Intelligent,
organized and whit many effort from many women that wants to manipulate the
world and powerless men and coercing their rights and merit. Machismo never had
been teacher in faculties and never had been intellectualized and justified
their ideologies and easy natural ways to establish relationship whit the
nature, men and women.
The nature is machismo and the world should follow as well, even if
it is not 100% machismo and is balanced in some ways, becoming humanist too,
however feminist wants to manipulate the nature whit the science as they make
to treat some disadvantages of women, but they don’t allow for the disadvantages
of men to make as well, in conclusion if the nature is manipulated so the men
are, and should be even better men become homosexuals to don’t be exploited and
abused by the feminist and by women, directly and directly, you can see a live
between homosexuals are easier and less serious than between a heterosexual
natural couple, nowadays…
Even the transsexuals, they are one direct or indirect cause of the
feminism as underestimation of men, including masculinity and effect of
hormonal disrupters (phthalates, biphenols and many unknown substances, yet,
but however, fortunately it affects women as well even if not so much or not
well known, when well studies their affect they feminist scientist and
organizations would start to coerce those substances juridically by their
influences in the 3 powers of the society and men will benefit from that, too),
overflow of female hormones and toxic hormones and substances in men, pollution
and illness against men.
You can see many men screwed in the feminist countries, many of them
are dead, many of them are in arrested, many of them left the country, many of
them are homosexuals, many of the become illness including psychiatric, many of
them change the sex, many of them don’t make sex and don’t live whit a women
because is difficult and mostly the consequences and fake accusations and money
lost that they can suffer, so feminism is putting the relation whit women
difficult and dangerous for men, even if they have to commit crimes in self
defense or personal justice against bad women that become evils form love or
another sentimental relationship.
They say in popular common sense, but that we can rectified to god
sense, that a man when deals whit a bad women (usually used popular as bitch)
or he died or he’s arrest. To complete in majority of the cases it is like
that, when you don’t know the ideological, ethics, rationality, behavior and
psychological stability and good influences from women that you deal or live.
So better alone and whit masturbation that whit women, you have
probably much negative consequences whit them specially in feminist countries
under the feminist law that it is manipulated by the international
organizations from human rights, that are hypocrite whit men and discriminated
negatively or by negligence men.
The friend can become enemy, love can become hate, as the positive
extremely sense of live and nature, when don’t have a stable and balanced
relationship and limited confront in bad times that could help to negotiate and
establish the relationship.
For feminist and many women, man is not a human being and is worst
than that, so they discriminate or they don’t treat well them as a women or
themselves.
You can see the andropauses, the males illness (prostate cancer,
epididime and testicle cancer, too) and homologate illness is not done,
studies, treated in man, that is sadist and coerced to the mediatisation by the
feminist journalist and politicians. That we can compare whit the menopause and
development in the breast cancer and uterus.
The sensiblisation of international, national feminists days are
psychological violence against men, manipulation of Society and intellectual
violence, too, all because there are many feminist in the united nations
feminist sections and international organizations, that are protected by men
and those men are being used by feminism as always, including in the Muslims
countries.
Even the weaker catholic church in being used by feminist against
the humanist that Jesus Christ try to stimulate whit all human beings, using catholic
organizations, universities and many catholic influences, even if it is used
demagogic arguments, deductive, fallacious and sophist arguments to manipulate
them, as the feminist are getting successful.
It probably that would have to arrive a time that we would have to
give owner live to fight in courts or in war fields against feminist and many
feminist women that want sadistlly destroy and controlled men but don’t want
the reciprocity acts, as they make those violence against children, too, but are
not charged criminally of that and they don’t tell the truth or justified but
coerce justification for men when men acts in same way.
It seems that there is no men, yet, that have the sensitivity
juridical philosophy to argue against the feminists thesis in media, politics
and organizations, probably because they are afraid to become victims or
revenge form women and feminists, that coerce his freedom and rights, even
liberty or objection of conscience.
The feminist suffer progress because many women that had be mothers
exploited and manipulate their males sons, that those sons were in power
positions that let them vote and gains more powers (see in the US women’s votes
history how started), so those mothers they used the female sexual determinism
to exploit men that are there sons, even if those females know that they are
destroying the rights from their males sons directly or indirectly and
inequality.
Men are exploited sexually by his sexual determinism and affective
determinism that could be reproductive or maternally. Many women that were
domestics treating the children took vantage of that to manipulate them when
adults to defend them are their lobbies, even if they say complaining
demagogically that were discriminated because had children to take care and
could not work, that’s hypocrisy and is selfish because we cannot have all, you
have to chose and make your option one or another not both, but for women is
all, actually, specially in feminists countries that is increasing up to 80% in
this world specially in richest countries, that the males AND MANY MALES
foreigners are exploited in civil construction died in civil construction and
many dangerous works including army, as US, Canada, UK, France, Spain, Belgium,
Germany, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Switzerland (rich country whit the
gold from the Jews and fiscal paradises, etc), Italy, Ireland and many more.
If you have the power and conditions for that, join us creating
international organizations of andro-humanist rights, write books in several
languages that you can used this ideas written here, create the international
association of jurist men males rights, integrate the international organizations
as the united nations council of human rights to confront the feminist
organizations and defend men’s rights, create a male international associations
network and males solidarity, create a country only for men, whit university,
schools, laboratories, courts and men rights organizations, make lawsuits
against unfair law in the national (supreme court and constitutional court),
European (human rights European court and or European communities courts) and
international courts (many that belongs to the hypocrite United Nations that is
controlled by the Anglo-Saxony countries)
if this last ones have jurisdiction, to be invalid the application of
the law or rectified.
Best regards.
Thank you.
VIAMREC
VIRTUAL INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MEN’S RIGHTS AND EQUALITY CONDITION
viamrec
30/04/2010 at 12:09
je réponds au justicier masqué en prenant la défense de Souad Razzouk, je lui conseille de ne pas sortir du domaine politique ni par ses intentions ni par ses pensées et laissé tout être sur terre à ses propres convictions religieuses même quand elle ne sont pas à la convenance des autres.
Car il y’a là signe de rupture avec la démocratie et la laïcité en vigueur dans ce pays
belaid
26/03/2012 at 9:45