Shweta Desai
21 May 2021•Update: 21 May 2021
PARIS
France’s Constitutional Council deemed “unconstitutional” a controversial Article in the new security law that punishes publicly identifying on-duty police officials.
The top court delivered its decision on the recently approved law for comprehensive security.
Prime Minister Jean Castex and 120 lawmakers approached the Council to rule on the conformity of certain provisions in the law.
Article 52, which was rewritten following wide-scale condemnation and protests by journalists and civil society groups, imposed a five-year prison term and a fine of €75,000 $89,000) for “provocation, with the obvious aim of causing harm to his physical or mental integrity,” in identifying police or gendarmerie forces during an operation.
Lawmakers opposed to the provision contended that text of the Article was “vague and susceptible to multiple interpretations” and infringed on freedom of expression. There were also concerns that it could be used to arrest protesters and journalists for filming law enforcement during demonstrations or police operations.
The Council noted the Article has “not sufficiently defined the elements constituting the offense.”
Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin, a staunch supporter of the security law, said he took note of the decision and would work with the prime minister "to improve the provisions'' on which the Council has reserved its judgment.
Police unions that are demanding stronger laws to protect forces from attacks by civilians and endorsed the harsher provisions, regretted the decision. “It demonstrates that France stagnates on the rights of certain humans and continues to deprive the police of the right to protect their identity,” tweeted Linda Kebbab, national delegate of the Unite SGP Police FO union.
Media watchdog Reporters Without Borders, which campaigned demanding the removal of Article 52 because it would obstruct journalists from covering various protests and hamper efforts to report fairly on clashes between demonstrators and police force, welcomed the decision.
It presented arguments with the Council opposing the Article as a violation of press freedoms.
