Sandrine Rousseau, at the National Assembly on January 30, 2024.” title=”Sandrine Rousseau, at the National Assembly on January 30, 2024.”/> EMMANUEL DUNAND / AFP Sandrine Rousseau, at the National Assembly on January 30, 2024.
EMMANUEL DUNAND / AFP
Sandrine Rousseau, at the National Assembly on January 30, 2024.
POLICY – “We must continue”. This Tuesday, November 5, the environmentalist deputy for Paris Sandrine Rousseau reopens a commission of inquiry dear to many: that on violence committed in the cinema, audiovisual, live performance, fashion and advertising sectors. Launched in May 2024 at the request of actress Judith Godrèche, it was suspended by the dissolution. Before being relaunched following a unanimous vote by the National Assembly at the beginning of October.
Last spring, the file was entrusted to Erwan Balanant, MoDem deputy for Finistère appointed president of the commission of inquiry, and his rapporteur Francesca Pasquini, environmentalist deputy for Hauts-de-Seine. But the elected representative from Ile-de-France lost her seat in the June legislative elections and Sandrine Rousseau therefore “taken up the torch” as president – Erwan Balanant this time takes the place of rapporteur.
The commission of inquiry is scheduled to last 11 weeks, with conclusions expected around April 2025. Will they result in a proposed law? Or amendments to better regulate certain practices? Sandrine Rousseau does not comment, but says ” hope “ achieve transpartisan work. Interview.
HuffPost. Where did the work of the last commission stop?
Sandrine Rousseau. The previous commission of inquiry had carried out all the institutional hearings (the CNC, the Federation of Cinema, Audiovisual and Multimedia Industries, etc.). So she had an overview of what was happening. At the time of the dissolution, it was just beginning to tackle the most concrete cases, with hearings of personalities.
Is this work obsolete? Or will you be able to repeat some auditions?
We’re going to do a mix. Certain hearings which only affected the institutional framework will not be repeated, because the elements that we have recovered are sufficient. On the other hand, there are other hearings that we will allow ourselves to redo, because we need clarification.
Do you already have an idea of the personalities who will be heard? Could Judith Godrèche or Michel Hazanavicius be summoned again?
We haven’t refereed yet. But yes, they are among the people we think about contacting again. The institutions about which we have mixed feedback will undoubtedly also be remembered.
It’s not just a story between two people, it’s not an intimate story. It’s more than that.
What are the concrete objectives of this commission?
We are neither judges nor journalists. We are legislators and what we want is to have the most interesting insights to legislate and put in place real protection for children, women but also men who are victims.
Francesca Pasquini had mentioned several avenues: supervision of the role of “child manager”, the presence of an intimacy coordinator for certain scenes. Are you going to take them back?
Yes. More broadly, the question is that of responsibility: who is responsible for the safety of people on set? Some say it’s the intimacy coordinator, others the producer, still others the director… This shows that the chain of responsibility on how to ensure security needs to be clarified.
Did the first commission of inquiry make it possible to further lift the silence on violence in the audiovisual sector?
We saw this during the commission of inquiry into sexual violence in sport: testimonies make it possible to make things happen because these are not theoretical debates but very concrete debates, on what what happened, for whom, how, why no one reacted. I think this is also valid in the entertainment industry.
When we listen to Adèle Haenel, Judith Godrèche, all the people who spoke, we realize that everything happened in full view of everyone. It’s not just a story between two people, it’s not an intimate story, it’s more than that. It happened publicly. We must understand how such things could happen? What explains it? And answer this question: how do we ensure that this is no longer possible?
Also see on The HuffPost:
