Starts of fire, numerous incidents… The demonstration against the pension reform, Thursday, March 23, in Paris, was marred by violence throughout the territory. The entire Parisian protest saw the police and demonstrators clash at the head of the procession, some dressed in black and equipped with masks and glasses. Similar scenes could be seen in the rest of France. According to the Ministry of the Interior, 441 police officers and gendarmes were injured and 457 people arrested throughout the country.
The demonstration against the pension reform has sparked new criticism of the brutality of the police against opponents, this Thursday, March 23. Eleven judicial investigations have been entrusted to the General Inspectorate of the National Police (IGPN), announced Friday, Gérald Darmanin. Several activists from the local CGT union in Nantes were the target of an assault by BAC police officers while they were on the terrace, Place du Bouffay. For its part, the group Europe Écologie-Les Verts de Lyon denounces police violence during the demonstration, in Bellecour. The opportunity to make a point of law: in what context can a police officer use physical force? This use must respond to a specific framework, provided for law enforcement. “Force is used to limit rights. In this context, the police have powers and weapons. The regulations therefore give them their powers and codify their use”, explains Sebastian Roché, research director at the CNRS and author of the book The Unfinished Nation. Youth facing the school and the police (ed. Grasset)
On the aspect of maintaining order, France relies on European principles, including that of “absolute necessity and proportionality of force”. Foundations taken up by the national law enforcement plan (SNMO), the latest version of which dates from December 2021. “This is a collection that mixes principles of law and technical choices”, indicates Sebastian Roché. In this 40-page documentit is clearly mentioned that “the use of force by the internal security forces must be absolutely necessary, strictly proportionate and graduated, with appropriate means […] In this respect, the weapons of intermediate law enforcement are necessary for the “law enforcement”, completes the SNMO.
The force deployed must “be proportionate”
Also, the Articles R. 431-3 of the Penal Code And R. 211-13 of the Internal Security Code provide that “the use of force by the representatives of the public force is only possible if the circumstances make it absolutely necessary for the maintenance of public order”. They also specify that “the force deployed must be proportionate to the disturbance to be stopped and must end when it has ceased”. For example, the police are authorized to dispel a crowd “after two summonses to disperse if they remain without effect”, explain article L211-9 of the Internal Security Code. According to the Penal Code, if a person continues to be part of a crowd after the summons, this constitutes an offence.
This legal framework allows the police to justify their interventions during demonstrations, whether declared or spontaneous. However, police actions are struggling to fit into a clear strategy. Monday, March 20, a tweet showed “Brav-M” agents violently charging protesters. One of the officers is seen hitting young people for no apparent reason. “When you chase demonstrators, without the aim of arrest, it does not correspond to any framework. There is neither proportionality nor necessity, affirms Sebastian Roché. We do not see the benefit of chasing after a person and leaving him on the ground. In this case, it is because it is a punishment, the policeman then becomes the judge.”
In addition, several “traps”, which consist for the police of blocking demonstrators in a given place, were observed on the sidelines of the demonstrations against the pension reform. Its detractors denounce the legality of the process. What does the law say about its use? In 2021, the SNMO was forced to review its copy, the Council of State judging illegal the technique of the trap as it was planned.
“The Council of State wanted the trap to be provided only in the event of serious and imminent danger, so the government added this notion. Only the threatening group should be trap and not everyone”, recalls Sebastian Roché. In its second version, the SNMO also provided that the officer in charge had to regularly re-examine the merits of the trap.
“Legally irresponsible modes of action”
But what about on the ground? “The police are going to trap, because they have received the instruction. But, who is going to check that these traps are legal or illegal? Nobody”, answers Sebastian Roché. In other words, there are, on the one hand, texts that exist and, on the other, a practice that is very little “controlled”. Especially since the identity of the agents remains very difficult to control because the 7 digits of the repository of identities and organization (RIO) are difficult to identify. “We will not be able to seek their individual responsibility, nor their responsibility as leaders”, still maintains Sebastian Roché. This facilitates courses of action that are legally irresponsible.”
Hence the important role played by the videos broadcast on social networks which provide information. “It’s a revolution,” says the researcher. As a reminder, it is completely legal to film the police. This is underlined by the Minister of the Interior in a circular dated December 23, 2008: “Subject to strict ethical rules, a police officer must comply with them in each of his missions and must not fear the recording of images or sounds.” On mission, a member of the police – policeman as gendarme – cannot oppose the recording, “whether it is the fact of a journalist or a private individual”. While violence against the press has been documented, the SNMO clearly indicates that “their physical safety must be guaranteed” and that it is “imperative to protect the right to inform.”
Finally, do some weapons allow the use of proportionate force as provided for in the texts? Disencirclement grenades are in the sights of many associations which are calling for their ban, starting with Amnesty International. According to the NGO, it would not allow “discriminated use”, that is to say targeted use. What about the use of defense ball launchers (LBD)? “Doctors and rights advocates agree that these weapons should not be used in crowds or risk injuring someone who is not targeted. more restricted, which shows that the police can do without it and that new instructions have been given”, concludes Sebastian Roché.