Published on Tuesday, the new opinion shows that despite a series of amendments made since the Council of State’s first opinion on 25 February, several formal objections remain. These legal objections prevent the bill, intended to broaden police authority to issue extended dispersal orders, from proceeding to a final vote.
A key unresolved issue concerns the circumstances in which the police would be allowed to intervene. The Council of State maintains that the draft still uses overly vague wording when referring to threats to security, public health, and tranquillity.
The Council also continues to question the role of mayors in the procedure, noting that the draft does not clearly define when and how mayors should intervene. It calls for greater clarification to eliminate the risk of arbitrary decisions and to ensure consistent application across all municipalities.
These two concerns, among others, are restated in the supplementary opinion.
As a result, Minister of Home Affairs Léon Gloden of the Christian Social People’s Party (CSV) will have to revise the text yet again. The draft law (No. 8426) also remains politically sensitive.
