The lawyer denounces “disproportionate” police interventions. According to him, “we must return to a real ethics of the police”.
“We are in a particularly alarming situation for democracy”, was moved on Wednesday March 22 on franceinfo Me Patrick Baudouin, president of the League of Human Rights while the social movement against pension reform has been hardening for a few days after the use of 49.3. Several demonstrators denounced police violence and arbitrary arrests during the rallies.
Does this social movement, which is clearly overflowing, worry you?
It was fully predictable in the face of the deafness and blindness of power and on the other hand, it is indeed extremely worrying because one has the feeling that it is uncontrolled and uncontrollable. We don’t know where we are going. We are in a particularly alarming situation for democracy and in the presence of police violence which can only degenerate the situation.
The Minister of the Interior asks the police not to respond to provocations from the far left. As long as the demonstrations are not declared, the prefect of police will not allow the disorder, he assures. Is this the right way to work?
It kind of gives the impression of an arsonist who then has a little trouble putting out the fire. We must not forget that the cause of these demonstrations is once again the stubbornness of power. Unauthorized demonstrations are not prohibited demonstrations. You have to make the difference. These are spontaneous gatherings, which moreover generally take place more or less peacefully, until the police intervene. These interventions by the police are now again, as was the case at the time of the Yellow Vests crisis, disproportionate. We see first of all, and this has just been denounced by the Defender of Rights, abusive, preventive arrests, that is to say of demonstrators whom we will try to prevent from gaining access to the place of a gathering. It is an attack on the freedom of demonstration. The other elements that we have seen in the past days, it is all the same again excessively violent behavior on the part of the police. We return to what is called the technique of the net which was however prohibited by the Council of State.
300 police officers injured since the beginning of the movement against the pension reform, including two seriously. The police are also victims of violence. Do you agree?
I hear the argument. I’m not here to ‘hit the police’ at all. This is not at all the position of the League. I do not dispute either the difficulty of the job or the fact that it is obviously not normal for police officers to be injured. The problem is the response that is provided at the level of power, in the technique of maintaining order. It is again a technique of provocation and violence which itself will inevitably generate a reaction which will carry over to the police officers themselves. So we have to go back to a real code of ethics for the forces of order. The police have an identification number because there are abuses, there are mistakes, it is indisputable. The Rio number, [ce numéro d’identification individuel] you don’t see it for many police officers. However, it is also elementary in terms of ethics. That’s what we blame. Today, there is also the use of bludgeoning which is quite systematic all the same. The Motorized Violent Action Repression Brigades (Brav M) are somewhat outside the scope of normal law enforcement. They are violence repression brigades which themselves act in a way that is immediately perceived as violent. So it definitely causes a spark.
Emmanuel Macron believes in front of the deputies of the majority that the crowd has no “legitimacy” against the people who express themselves through their elected officials. It’s a soothing speech, do you think?
Certainly not. A distinction must be made between legality and legitimacy. There are periods in our history when we have had laws that were adopted in full compliance with legal and constitutional provisions and yet it was illegitimate. What Mr Macron forgets is that today there is legitimacy in the reaction of the street because, obviously, there is a large-scale popular movement which is overwhelmingly and very largely hostile to this pension reform and how it happened in Parliament. Coming to tell us today that there is no legitimacy to this action is extremely provocative and moreover, it is historically erroneous. This is again adding fuel to the fire.
