Are the closures of town halls against the pension reform legal?

The call to the mayors of Fabien Roussel was heard by “hundreds” of city officials, according to the communist official. He asked them to close symbolically this Tuesday in solidarity with the new mobilization against the pension reform who faces a opposition tenace. Several town halls have followed suit Anne Hidalgoelected PS of Paris, enough to trigger the fury in the government.

“I have a bit of the feeling that the mayor of Paris is confusing municipal services with an annex of the Socialist Party”, retorted the Minister of Labor Olivier Dussopt evoking a problem of “neutrality”. The closure of town halls in support of a strike does it really pose a problem of neutrality? Are they just legal? What legal issues do they raise? “The decision to close town halls is open to challenge, the act is subject to appeal”, decides with 20 Minutes Anne-Andréa Vilerio, public law lawyer.

What do these closures actually consist of?

The first to respond to Fabien Roussel was Anne Hidalgo, elected from the capital, followed by several municipalities. As far as Paris City Hall is concerned, the Hôtel de Ville will remain closed to the public all day, as well as the exhibition Capital(s) on urban art, and two posters “Town hall in solidarity with the social movement will be installed on the facade, the City told AFP. Only the ” stopover women for homeless women will be accessible. A “broad invitation” to put oneself in telework is also launched to non-striking agents. However, city officials who cannot telework will be able to access City Hall. The decision to close or not the town halls of the district is on the other hand left to the free appreciation of each of them. In the latter, civil status will however remain open and marriages will continue to be insured.

In the Val de Marne the mayor of Bonneuil-sur-Marne, Denis Öztorun Ömür, has decided to symbolically close his town hall. Fontenay-sous-Bois, Ivry-sur-Seine, and Villejuif have announced the closure of their municipal services, reports The Parisian. But also Montreuil, Lens and the LFI mayor of Faches-Thumesnil (Nord), Patrick Proisy, announced that the strike hours of the agents of his city would not be counted from 2 p.m., “so that they can go afternoon at the demonstration in Lille”.

Is closing a town hall in support of a social movement legal?

If it is not completely new, it is a rare action to see town halls mobilize in this way against a government reform bill. And if it can be agreed in the context of a political confrontation, “expressed support” for the strikers, according to Stéphane Sirot, historian and specialist in social movements contacted by 20 Minutes, at the level of the law, it is much more debatable. It is even likely to generate appeals, in particular from municipal councillors.

As Anne-Andréa Vilerio recalls, a legal precedent gave rise to case law when the Lyon administrative court of appeal ruled in 2018 that it was illegal to partially close public services. “The mayor of Grenoble took part in a national movement, of a political nature, against the reduction in state grants decided by the government. Such a reason, foreign to the interest of the municipality or to the proper functioning of municipal services, is likely to taint this decision with illegality, ”we can read in the decision.

Moreover, if the decision taken in solidarity with the strike movement of January 31 tends not to penalize the strikers financially, this can be interpreted as “a public subsidy disguised”, however, the latter “should never be attributed to political ends”, underlines for his part Jean-Paul Markus, professor of public law at the University of Paris-Saclay, contacted by 20 Minutes. In addition, the decision of the town hall of Faches-Thumesnil not to count the strike hours from 2 p.m. goes against the principle of “service done”, namely “that we cannot pay an agent if the service was not done”, he abounds.

What is the principle of neutrality?

Invoked by the Minister of Labour, the ” principle of neutrality » of persons and public officials is expressed, in the law, within the framework of the secularism, shade Anne-Andréa Vilerio. However, case law from the Council of State frames this principle of neutrality more closely in order to “prevent the public service from being used for the purposes of political propaganda”, sums up the lawyer. “The principle of neutrality of public services is opposed to the affixing to public buildings of signs symbolizing the assertion of political, religious or philosophical opinions”, thus judged the Council of State in 2005. The posters “Town hall in solidarity with the social movement” which will be installed on the facade of the town hall of Paris are again likely to come into conflict with the law.

And if the mayor is a political personality, elected thanks to a program or to his political affiliation and he has “full freedom of expression”, he is also an administrative agent and in this sense, “he must be neutral in his administrative mission”, develops Jean-Paul Markus.

But for Stéphane Sirot, this action to close town halls is part of “a balance of power which is also played out in the political field and those who are offended by it are mainly elected officials or leaders of the majority”. And to emphasize that “the government is also far from respecting neutrality whenhe sends emails to civil servants to explain a reform which has not yet been voted on”, he annoys. It remains to be seen whether city councilors will attempt legal action to challenge the closures planned for Tuesday.