PoliticalRepoPoliticalRepo

Netherlands · Motion · Motie

2016Z10266

Motion by members Swinkels and Van Nispen on a realistic compensation for lawyers who provide legal assistance during a police interrogation

rejectedNetherlands· House of Representatives· NL

Introduced

25 May 2016

Last action

31 May 2016 · Rejected

Status

Afgedaan · Stemmen - verworpen · Niet beschikbaar bij moties en/of amendementen vóór 1 april 2019

Sponsors

Judith Swinkels, Michiel van Nispen

Subjects

Discovery layer

Source updated

19 February 2024

Summary

Motion by members Swinkels and Van Nispen on a realistic compensation for lawyers who provide legal assistance during a police interrogation

Machine translation from Dutch. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

  1. 24 May 2016

    Motion

    Motion by members Swinkels and Van Nispen on a realistic compensation for lawyers who provide legal assistance during a police interrogation

    Source: Motion

  2. 25 May 2016

    Introduced

    Introduced.

    Source: Introduced

  3. 31 May 2016

    Rejected

    Rejected.

    Source: Stemmen - rejected

Votes

31 May 2016 · rejected · Stemmen - verworpen

Yes 45 · No 105 · Abstain 0 · Absent/not voting 0

  • 50PLUSVoor
  • CDATegen
  • ChristenUnieVoor
  • D66Voor
  • GroenLinksVoor
  • Groep Bontes/Van KlaverenTegen
  • Groep Kuzu/ÖztürkVoor
  • HouwersTegen

Showing the first 8 recorded positions. Vote totals above are complete.

Versions

  • v3 · 26 May 2016
  • 2016D21321 · 24 May 2016
  • 2016D21321 · 24 May 2016

Documents

1 official file

Motie van de leden Swinkels en Van Nispen over een reële vergoeding voor advocaten die rechtsbijstand verlenen bij een politieverhoor

View fileDownload file

  • Motie van de leden Swinkels en Van Nispen over een reële vergoeding voor advocaten die rechtsbijstand verlenen bij een politieverhoor

    Motie · NL · 24 May 2016

    ViewDownloadOpen at official source

Sponsors

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.

Sources

PoliticalRepo is an index and interpretation layer, not the authoritative legal source.