"WE DIDN'T VOTE FOR THIS"

"Mr. President, we did not vote for this." This is the opening statement of the open letter to Emmanuel Macron signed by French scientists and cultural figures. They express their regret for voting for him in 2017.

Moreover, the authors believe that one of the articles of the newly adopted law, which they oppose, could bring the French government to the European Court in Luxembourg.

Macron's way

After coming to power in 2017 with a promise to change the country's political landscape, Macron declared that he was "neither left nor right." The young and ambitious politician received the confidence of French voters, who were tired of the same politicians in the government. So, they elected Macron not only as their president. They also secured a solid majority of his novel party Forward, Republic! (LREM) in the National Assembly, the lower house of parliament.

However, from the very beginning, a lot of things went wrong with the young politician in domestic politics. And he quickly began to lose supporters who became disillusioned with some of his economic reforms.

The massive protests of the yellow vest movement and the coronavirus crisis also did not add to Macron’s popularity. All these facts had a considerable effect on the nationwide municipal elections this year. LREM, as a new political force without deep roots in local politics, has devastatingly lost in almost all major cities of the country. As a result, centrifugal processes have intensified in the weakened ruling party. It suffered the most tangible losses in the parliament. In May, LREM lost an absolute majority of seats in the National Assembly after another 7 MPs (26 in two years) announced their withdrawal from the faction. In September, after a partial rotation, Macron's party also lost seats in the Senate.

The next presidential elections in France will take place in 2022. therefore, Macron seems determined to demonstrate his intention to carry out internal security reforms, which causes the public concerns in the country.

A series of terrorist attacks committed by ISIS militants on November 13, 2015 triggered discussions on the need to combat religious extremism in France. The victims of attacks, the largest in the history of France, were 130 people with more than 350 injured.

Since then, the issue of security has been one of the most important issues for the French. A poll in October, a week after the assassination of history teacher Samuel Paty, showed that 87% of the country's population believed the "secular worldview" was in danger.

Global security

On November 20, the National Assembly, in which the LREM is still securing a majority thanks to the support of the centrist Democratic Movement, voted to pass the Global Security Law.

As the name suggests, the law should be aimed at the global security of French society, but it caused an extremely negative reaction both in France (an open letter from cultural and scientific figures) and abroad. In particular, the UN human rights experts stated that the law "is incompatible with international human rights norms and should be revised." Protest rallies began to take place throughout France, many of them ending in clashes with the police, which, according to this law, must provide security.

Why does Macron anger everyone so much that they even talk about the political crisis in the country?

One of the authors of the letter, former commander of the RAID police special forces Jean-Michel Fauvergues, explains the need for this law to protect law enforcement officers who are at risk of harassment, threats and violence. He believes it is also an opportunity to make their work more modern and efficient.

The most controversial is Article 24 of the bill, which criminalizes the publication of photographs or videos in which police or gendarmes can be identified if there is an intent to harm their "physical or psychological integrity."

Later, the bill was amended to clarify that filming or photographing police officers is allowed if they do not intentionally cause harm. However, this wording leaves it up to the police to determine whether the person holding the camera displayed malicious intent.

This spring, a similar bill was already considered in parliament, but was rejected. But this time it was supported by the Minister of the Interior Gerald Darmanin. “I made a promise that it will no longer be possible to broadcast images of police and gendarmes on social networks. This promise will be fulfilled,” Darmanin said ignoring the widespread wave of protests.

Freedom of information is not the only freedom that the law threatens. It also empowers police to use pedestrian and other security cameras plus drones to "maintain public order and track offenders." Members of the national police and gendarmerie are also exempt from liability for carrying weapons when not on duty.

In general, the bill is criticized for extending the powers of the municipal police and private security structures unnecessarily, which threatens privacy, freedom of speech and assembly. The National Human Rights Commission considered this as "an almost unlimited strengthening of the control over the population" and repressive tendencies in the policy of the authorities.

Under these conditions, the government was forced to appoint an independent commission, which should, in particular, determine how to combine the observance of freedom of information and human rights with the protection of law enforcement officials.

It is rumoured that the government may even remove the controversial article 24 altogether, since its content is included in another bill – on strengthening republican principles, which will be submitted to parliament in January. Article 25 of the bill assumes criminal punishment for endangering life by disseminating "information concerning the private, family or professional life" of public officials. Gendarmes and police officers as civil servants are also subject to this article.

At the same time, the vague wording of the bill opens the way to arbitrariness. How it differs from that stipulated in the law On global security is not clear. According to the Minister of Justice, Eric Dupont-Moretti, "in criminal law, people cannot be prosecuted for intent."

Republican principles

At the beginning of the year, the French government created a group of units in all departments (territorial-administrative units) of the country “to combat Islamism and the isolation of communities”. These units, according to Macron, have the right to prohibit events organized by radical Islamist movements and obstruct the activities of associations that popularize political Islam.

In early December, French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin announced that law enforcement agencies intend to conduct a "large-scale and unprecedented" campaign to combat "religious separatism" in the country. According to Darmanin, 76 mosques (out of 2600 existing Muslim prayer centres in France) suspected of "separatism" will be investigated.

Emmanuel Macron formulated the concept of "Islamist separatism" in the new bill on strengthening republican principles presented to the public, which is aimed at combating the preferences of religious laws over republican secular values in France.

According to Macron, the 1905 law on secularism allows people to belong to any religion of their choice, but under no circumstances should the outward manifestation of religious affiliation be allowed in schools or in public service. In addition, he said, "Islam in France must be freed from foreign influence."

Among the main provisions of the bill are the protection of secularity and neutrality in public services, strengthening control over public organizations, control of teaching foreign languages, including the Arabic, Turkish and other languages taught in public schools. The bill provides for transparency in the financing of religious activities, the organization of training classes for imams and the gradual abandonment of the practice of imams from abroad, the development of academic Islamic studies. In addition, the draft of the bill assumes the compulsory attendance of school for all children from the age of three, and schooling at home only for medical reasons. After the murder of teacher Samuel Paty, the bill was supplemented with a clause on punishment for inciting hatred on the Internet.

We should also expect further strengthening of control over private schools, which are outside the public funding system – the schools, which do not receive any subsidies from the state budget, and are free not to comply with the state school curriculum.

The French Council for Muslim Religious Affairs (CFCM) has been asked to sign a "charter of secular values" and create a Council of Imams, which will further have to carry out certification of religious leaders. However, the effectiveness of these measures is questionable, as the CFCM does not enjoy broad support from believers in France.

Everything is changing

The French president's offensive against "Islamist separatism" and his security concerns have convinced neither the right nor the left. Some are outraged by the lack of determination, while others condemn him for drifting to the right.

On the eve of the presidential elections, Macron will make more attempts to restore the confidence of the electorate. But judging by his readiness to change his decisions under public pressure, these two bills are likely to have many more amendments.

France's political landscape is constantly changing. As Macron has promised.