Six Objections

Three draft laws were first submitted by the previous government four years ago. The Council of State raised substantial concerns at the time. Ministers Élisabeth Margue and Claude Meisch amended the texts last year. The latest versions have still drawn formal objections. The Council of State waited a year to issue its opinions. The government waited four years for the laws. The Council of State waited a year for the opinions. The opinions are what the Council issued. The objections are what the opinions contained. The objections are six. The six are what the government must address. The government must revise. The revise is what the six require. The six require what the government must do. The government must do what the six require.[1]

Draft 7991

Luxembourg has not had a dedicated youth criminal law. Draft law 7991 is intended to change this. The change is what 7991 proposes. The proposal is what the change is. Minors aged 13 and above could be held criminally responsible. The approach would be pedagogical. Young people who show insight and cooperate could receive alternatives to traditional sentences. The pedagogical is what the approach would be. The approach is what the 13 and above would face. The 13 and above is who the criminal responsibility would cover. The criminal responsibility is what the 7991 introduces. The 7991 introduces what the pedagogical approach would moderate. The moderate is what the alternatives would do. The alternatives are what the insight and cooperation would earn. The insight is what the pedagogical values. The cooperation is what the pedagogical rewards. The rewards are what the alternatives are. The alternatives are what the traditional sentences are not. The traditional sentences are what the alternatives replace. The replacement is what the 7991 proposes. The 7991 is what the six objections target. The six objections are what the 7991 faces.[1]

The Right to Counsel

The most significant objection: in some situations, minors would be able to waive their right to legal counsel. The Council of State says legal representation should be mandatory. The mandatory is what the Council wants. The waiver is what the draft allows. The waiver is what the Council objects to. The objection is what the Council issues. The Council issues the objection. The objection is about the waiver. The waiver is about the counsel. The counsel is about the minor. The minor is, by definition, vulnerable. The vulnerable is what the minor is. The minor is vulnerable. The vulnerable cannot waive. The waiver is what the vulnerable should not be allowed to do. The Council says the vulnerable should not waive. The draft says the vulnerable could waive. The could is what the Council objects to. The objects is what the Council does. The Council objects to the could. The could is what the draft says. The draft says what the Council objects to. The Council objects to what the draft says. The draft says the minor could waive. The Council says the minor should not.[1]

Data and Access

The Council raised issues concerning the sharing and access of data, especially by police and the Ministry of Family Affairs. The data is what the sharing concerns. The sharing is what the access concerns. The access is what the police and the Ministry want. The police and the Ministry want the access. The access is what the Council wants safeguards for. The safeguards are what the Council called for. The called for is what the Council did. The Council called for stronger legal safeguards. The stronger is what the legal safeguards should be. The legal safeguards should be stronger. The stronger is what the data needs. The data needs the stronger. The stronger is what the safeguards provide. The safeguards provide what the data needs. The data needs what the sharing risks. The sharing risks what the access enables. The access enables what the police and the Ministry want. The want is what the Council scrutinises. The Council scrutinises what the want enables. The enable is what the Council guards against. The guards against is what the Council does. The Council does what the safeguards require. The safeguards require what the Council demands. The Council demands what the government must provide.[1]

Closed Hearings

Draft law 7994 aims to fully separate the penal dimension from the protection of minors. The National Office for Children is to become the central institution. The central is what the National Office becomes. The becomes is what the 7994 proposes. The 7994 proposes what the Council objects to. The objects include closed hearings. The closed hearings would be allowed before the youth judge. The Council finds closed hearings problematic. The problematic is what the Council finds. The Council finds the closed hearings problematic. The closed hearings should remain public as a rule. The public is what the rule should be. The closed-door should be exceptional. The exceptional is what the closed-door should be. The closed-door is not what the rule should be. The rule should be public. The public is what the rule should be. The Council says the rule should be public. The draft says the closed-door could be the rule. The Council objects to the closed-door being the rule. The rule is what the Council wants public. The public is what the Council wants the rule to be.[1]

Four Years

Three draft laws. Four years. One year of waiting for opinions. Six formal objections. The Council of State has issued its opinions. The government must revise. The revise is what the six require. The six are what the revise must address. The address is what the government must do. The government must address the six. The six are what the Council raised. The Council raised the six. The six are what the opinions contain. The opinions are what the Council issued. The issued is what the year produced. The year is what the waiting took. The waiting is what the four years took. The four years are what the draft laws have waited. The draft laws have waited four years. The Council has waited one year. The six objections are what the waiting produced. The produced is what the waiting did. The waiting did what the produced is. The produced is six objections. The six objections are what the government must revise. The revise is what the next version will be. The next version is what the six will be addressed in. The addressed is what the government must do. The government must do what the Council requires. The Council requires what the six demand. The six demand what the government must address. The government must address the six. The six are the objections. The objections are the Council's. The Council's are the opinions. The opinions are the law's. The law is the children's. The children are what the law is for.[1]