Demonstrations against the pension reform: “We no longer really look at who we are challenging”

Brav M the story of a controversial brigade They are a

They denounce “arbitrary arrests and detentions” in the context of the demonstrations against the pension reform, in particular since the announcement of 49.3. Friday, March 31, a group of lawyers filed “a hundred complaints” in Paris, for “arbitrary infringement of freedom by a person holding public authority”, “non-intervention of a person to put an end to arbitrary deprivation of liberty” or even “obstructing the freedom to demonstrate”. For the twenty or so professional members of this movement, the numerous arrests and detentions of recent weeks would not be justified and would aim to “break the social movement”: in the capital, 75% of the procedures targeting demonstrators have actually been closed without further action by the floor. Clearly, only a quarter of police custody actually gave rise to judicial treatment.

Nationally, the criminal response rate is not much higher. According to the Ministry of Justice, 1,346 people were taken into custody from March 16 to 25 following the protests, but only 353 were subject to alternatives to prosecution or were prosecuted – a rate of 26%. A figure to put in perspective with the usual rate of criminal response, which amounts according to INSEE to 90% between 2012 and 2019 throughout France and for all cases. “This clearly raises the question of the freedom to demonstrate in France”, judge Claire Dujardin, president of the union of lawyers of France (SAF), who shows her support for the initiative of the collective. Interview.

L’Express: According to the figures provided by the Paris prosecutor’s office and the Chancellery, 75% of those arrested during the demonstrations against the pension reform and the use of 49.3 were therefore ultimately not prosecuted – whether in the capital or elsewhere in France. What do you think of this number?

Claire Dujardin: You have to realize that we are talking about mass arrests, and not exceptional situations. No less than 292 people were, for example, arrested in Paris on the first evening of the rally against 49.3. It is enormous. And indeed, this does not only concern the capital. There were arrests all over the territory, with many completely empty files in Rennes, Toulouse, Nantes, Lille, Lyon… This refers to what is called the judicialization of policing. That is to say that we have incorporated, in the doctrine of maintaining order, the possibility of massively arresting people who are demonstrating.

For this, several tools are made available to the police, in particular what are called provision sheets. These are fairly brief sheets, which allow you to quickly check off, from a list of offenses linked to the event, the one that best corresponds to the situation: remaining in a crowd despite warning, participation in a group with a view to committing violence, participation in the demonstration by concealing the face, rebellion, outrage, violence against a person holding public authority, carrying a weapon… Just write two or three elements to complete the form and justify the arrest, two or three words to characterize this offence, then the person is sent to the police station. Instead of the classic referral report, which should normally describe the person arrested, why he is, and how the arrest was made, this form is used. This tool exists since Notre-Dame-des-Landes, was used during the demonstrations of the yellow vests, and is used again now. This leads to mass arrests, which are easier and faster. We don’t really look at who we are calling on anymore: we take a lot of people in a net, then we sort them out afterwards.

By whom are these arrests carried out that the lawyers consider “abusive”?

We have found that they are often carried out by special intervention units, such as the BRAV-M which has been much talked about in Paris, or security and intervention companies (CSI) in certain departments. These intervention units are added to the law enforcement agencies specialized in maintaining order, and their mission is to support them and challenge them. This is where there is a real difficulty, which we had already pointed out during the yellow vests or even during the labor law: at the base, they do not have the same training as the CRS or the mobile gendarmes, who have learned to fight against violence by de-escalating, staying at a distance, not reacting to verbal attacks or the throwing of projectiles, for example… These brigades do not have the same state of mind at all, nor the same training. They go into contact and want to challenge more massively and will be able to use force in a disproportionate way. In our opinion, these units have nothing to do with the demonstrations, and participate in the disorder.

What are the consequences for the protesters?

This clearly raises the question of the freedom to demonstrate in France, especially since this is not the first time that we have seen this type of situation. Many French people will now demonstrate with the fear of being arbitrarily arrested or injured – since there is also the central question of the use of arms and the use of violence. Not to mention the various orders issued to ban demonstrations, which lead to the possibility of demonstrators being fined and fined for participating in a prohibited demonstration.

In a newspaper interview The world, the Paris police headquarters justifies the low rate of criminal response to these arrests by a material difficulty “to fully establish, within the period of police custody, the commission of the offense”. “It’s not that the offense hasn’t been committed, much less [qu’elle] was arbitrary”, is it added. What do you think?

The principles are reversed: initially, these arrests should be exceptional, and therefore characterized. The rights must be notified to the arrested person as soon as he is arrested, a referral report must be drawn up and sent immediately to the public prosecutor’s office. This is no longer the case with the massive arrests that we have seen for several weeks. The interpellation becomes a reflex. As I said earlier, this raises questions about the very concept of freedom to demonstrate. If people commit offences, they obviously have to be arrested, but not all policing should be dictated by the principle of arrest! Nor even by the disproportionate use of force, which creates excesses.

What happens once the person is arrested?

We have mainly seen classifications without following the outcome of police custody. For the rest, there is the possibility of an appearance on preliminary admission of guilt (CRPC), a procedure which makes it possible to quickly judge the author of an offense who admits the facts. People are in fact taken to court directly following custody, to be notified of a sentence.

We have also seen summonses to appear later in court for a judgment, with sometimes judicial controls as part of this summons. At the margins, there were also immediate appearances: those arrested are immediately sent back to court after custody. And there, we saw either acquittals, or sentences to work of general interest or suspended sentences.

Beyond the massive arrests, your union also denounces the distribution of decrees prohibiting demonstrations. Where are these procedures?

We have indeed made several appeals with the Syndicat de la magistrature and the Ligue des droits de l’homme against orders aimed at prohibiting these demonstrations, particularly in Paris. We had great difficulty finding where these decrees were published: they were published but not always published on the prefecture’s website, for example. Last Saturday, the Paris administrative court finally found that these orders violated the freedom to demonstrate and were not necessary, and suspended the weekend order. It’s a first step.

lep-life-health-03