In Times of War, Laws Fall Silent in France

The French National Assembly voted on February 16 to extend the state of emergency in France until May 26 of this year, Le Monde reported.  The state of emergency was first imposed on November 13 after the self-styled Islamic State perpetrated terrorist attacks in the nation’s capital. Parliamentary votes were overwhelmingly in favor of extending the state of emergency, the results of which have been mixed.

The state of emergency broadens the powers of the police and the Interior Ministry, which can now actively censor the Internet and social media, forbid public demonstration, and conduct search and seizure operations without substantial proof. The French newspaper Le Figaro has reported that French security forces have conducted 3,379 administrative searches over the past three months and collected only 42 weapons.

French Minister of the Interior, Bernard Cazeneuve, has defended the results of the state of emergency against criticisms of inefficiency. In a speech to the National Assembly on February 16, he stated, “If we only look at the number of court investigations regarding terrorism, the results could seem undermining; however, this is flawed reasoning. These investigations give information which complements other documents which could appear relevant weeks or months later.”

The Ministry of Interior’s operating practices have come under fire from Amnesty International, which called for the termination of the state of emergency on February 4. Le Monde reports that John Dalhuisen, President of the Europe and Asia chapter of Amnesty International, stated that “The powers of the executive have been extended in a relatively uncontrollable way and caused a series of human rights violations.” Dalhuisen added that the state of emergency has only led to “abusive, disproportionate, and discriminatory practices.”

Six National Assembly representatives, who originally voted against the state of emergency in November, are now reaffirming their position against it. The group released a public statement on February 15 condemning the measure. Their statement, published in the French newspaper Liberation, heavily criticized the extension, asserting that the vote reflected emotion more than reason and that it “made a state of exception more normal while weakening individual rights.”

The six representatives further debunked the spirit of law, judging that it only created a divide between French citizens. Several prominent judges have also criticized the societal tensions created by the state of emergency, noting that it fosters inequality and threatens minority groups in France.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls brushed aside these critiques and used the war against the Islamic State as his backing. At a weekly meeting of ministers on February 18, Valls claimed that only the permanent incorporation of an anti-terrorist law in France’s the penal code would be sufficient to lift the state of emergency. Critics have denounced this position, alleging that it could lead to a permanent state of emergency in France.

In light of this debate, it appears that France is torn between concerns of security and respect for individual rights. In the eyes of many French citizens, perhaps nothing rings more true than the words of the Roman philosopher Cicero: In times of war, the law falls silent.

Note: This article appeared in an abridged format for print on February 23, 2016.