According to RTL information, confirmed by the Ministry of the Interior, the Director General of the National Police (DGPN) decided at the end of last week to summon before the disciplinary council seven police officers involved at different levels in the failures which preceded the murder of Chahinez Boutaa by her husband last May in Mérignac.
Last June, a joint report from various inspections pointed to a series of errors of assessment and coordination between the police and the judiciary, in particular in the taking of one of Chahinez’s complaints and in the resulting investigation. is followed. These summons to the disciplinary council concern the entire hierarchical chain, and go up to the Departmental Director of Public Security (DDSP) of Gironde, the highest echelon of the department.
This decision on the part of the DGPN goes beyond the recommendations that had been formulated by the IGPN. Still according to our information, the police did not recommend going before the disciplinary council, where the sanctions can go as far as revocation, but proposed direct sanctions, a less cumbersome procedure and potentially less severe.
“We need rapid reactivity”
The seven police officers concerned will have the opportunity to explain their involvement before the disciplinary council. Recall that last July, Gérald Darmanin, the Minister of the Interior had promised sanctions “at all levels of the chain of responsibility”.
“I will be, beyond the sanctions imposed, very attentive in particular to the explanations that will be provided by the police officers who will be called before this disciplinary board, “says Me Julien Plouton, lawyer for the parents of the victim.
“I’m also interested in having their explanations on the conditions under which they were brought to carry out their mission. This file should lead to sensitizing investigators on this reactivity absolute when facts of such a nature are reported. We cannot be satisfied with carrying out investigations that are spread out over time. We need rapid responsiveness“, he continues before adding that” it is only the interpellation which makes it possible to avoid a new passage to the act “.
