“Some of the associations have gone astray.” In an interview given to L’Express on January 21, the Minister of the Interior blamed the humanitarian aid associations. Bruno Retailleau criticizes these mission or aid actors for migrants, believing that some carry out these public service delegation actions “without the slightest neutrality”. “Whether an association has a political agenda, wants to promote a policy of massive reception of immigration, that is its choice, he declared. What is shocking is when these associations take advantage of funding of the State to promote public policies other than those that the State wants to defend.
Among them, the tenant of Beauvau targets in particular Cimade, an association of solidarity and support for migrants, refugees and asylum seekers. “When Cimade organizes ‘Charters Awards’, ranking prefects by delivering them to vindictiveness, it is not acceptable,” he targeted, affirming that “some of these associations even advise migrants not to not go to consular appointments to block their identification. In an interview with L’Express, Fanélie Carrey-Conte, general secretary of La Cimade, responds to the Minister of the Interior’s comments.
The Express : In his interview with L’Express, Bruno Retailleau points out certain associations, including Cimade, describing them as having “a political agenda”. What do you think?
Fanélie Carrey-Conte: I note the ignorance of the law and the non-respect for freedom of association expressed by the minister in his approach. His comments are, from our point of view, extremely worrying. What does Cimade do? Like many other solidarity associations, it regularly points out the failings of administrations and public authorities in relation to France’s international commitments, legal rules, and foreigners’ rights. In this regard, Mr. Retailleau therefore criticizes Cimade for denouncing abusive and illegal practices by administrations. Its responsibility should be to put an end to these failings, not to criticize us when we denounce them.
Do you understand the criticisms he makes regarding your political positioning, while you exercise a public service mission?
Our association also expresses itself to bring into the public debate another vision of society, a demand for a paradigm shift in migration policies, which we want to see based on welcome and solidarity. It expresses these points of view, with the freedom that our democracy guarantees, while respecting the principle of freedom of expression and the rule of law. We would expect a Minister of the Interior to be the guarantor of the legal framework and public freedoms, elements which should not be called into question under the pretext of granting public funding. Instead, we see that its priority seems to be to outdo the attacks that Cimade and other associations are already regularly subject to in public debate.
For example when they are accused of all the clichés; one day accomplices of smugglers, the other of terrorists… Which regularly earns them cyberharassment and other threats, to discredit our role, to threaten us with defunding… We believe that the associations which invest daily in mutual aid, solidarity, respect for the rights and dignity of all are the honor and pride of our country. The minister’s comments are the opposite of that. We believe this is worrying and sad for our country.
He mentions in particular the question of the “Charters Awards” and believes that you are handing over the prefects “to vindictiveness”. Where does this initiative come from? What do you think of this statement?
The “Charters Awards” are an initiative that took place last November. Its aim was to use humor as a medium to evoke serious and painful things. Created on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of administrative detention centers (CRA), its objective was to highlight the illegal and abusive practices of prefectures and administrations in terms of detention and expulsion of foreigners. I would like to point out that these practices are condemned by various courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights. We were therefore not targeting people, but rather practices and political orientations. The latter lead to a certain number of abuses and breaches of the law on the ground. I’m talking about confinement of vulnerable people, of sick people. I’m talking about separation of families, expulsion to risky countries. We note that these denunciations pose a problem for the Ministry of the Interior. But here again, instead of attacking the freedom of testimony and expression of associations, its responsibility should be to put an end to these illegal practices. To guarantee respect for the laws and the rights of individuals.
Bruno Retailleau indicates that “some of these associations even advise migrants not to go to consular appointments to block their identification”. Are these comments founded?
I suppose that the minister is talking about the associations involved in the CRAs. Above all, I believe that he does not understand their role, or that he does not know what they do. These associations exercise in the CRAs the role assigned to them by law, namely that of informing people of their rights and their procedures. They thus inform people of the reason for these consular appointments, but also of the risks to which those who refuse a consular presentation or expulsion are exposed. The law provides for penalties for these refusals. Cimade is also fully aware of this: we regularly denounce these offenses which are specific to foreigners and which are added to the complex procedure and repression to which they are already subject.
Can you come back to the role of associations like Cimade in the CRAs?
In these centers, the associations intervene within the framework of a public market, to assist in the effective exercise of rights, a mission defined within the framework of the law. This means providing legal aid to detained people: informing them of the procedures to which they are subject, explaining to them their rights and the different appeal procedures that may exist, and allowing them effective access. Remember that the associations working in detention centers do not make decisions about the situations of the people detained.
Bruno Retailleau also mentions the fact of going through a legislative provision so that “the State regains control over certain public service delegations, for example with regard to legal advice to migrants”. What do you think of this proposal?
We can see behind this desire to “take back control” a questioning of the independence of these missions. It should also be noted that the minister speaks of “legal advice to migrants”, and not of assistance in the effective exercise of rights, as the law says today. Above all, we have the feeling that the minister is targeting in his criticism the role of citizen watchdog played by associations. We communicate on subjects of public interest and play an essential alert role. Our words shed light, a fortiori, on places of deprivation of liberty, which are by nature hidden from view. In the political moment we are experiencing, it seems essential to us to bear witness and for the freedom of speech and expression of associations to be fully guaranteed.
The minister considers France “too generous” because it is “the country in Europe which grants the most visas: more than 25% of visas issued by European countries”. What is your view on the matter?
I will not get into a debate on the figures. It is unbearable that migration issues are only seen from the angle of “migratory overflow”. Political speeches – from the current Minister of the Interior as well as from his predecessors – always have this tone. They present migration as a threat, a danger, to the detriment of reality. It’s unbearable. This amounts to fueling rejection, fear of others, and divisions that are dangerous for our collective future. La Cimade was created 85 years ago to denounce these visions, and we will continue to be there to continue to do so. Other futures are possible, which do not constantly evoke the stigma of migration. This statement is political, yes, because it defends the rule of law, democracy, and the fundamental rights of people.
.