The magistrates are concerned regarding the severity of the ministers of the interior and justice towards demonstrators, as well as their silence on police violence. They are particularly worried regarding the arrest of many people without reason and the low number of prosecutions once morest police officers who commit illegal violence. The Parisian magistrates’ union has written a letter to the prosecutor of the Republic of Paris expressing their concerns regarding these issues. They also want to know how many investigations have been opened into acts of violence by law enforcement officials during demonstrations.
The Paris prosecutor’s office has indicated that they have too much work to investigate every case revealed by the media, but they have opened 14 IGPN investigations since March 7. The magistrates are also critical of the harsh sentences handed down during immediate appearances and note that the prosecution almost systematically requests a ban on demonstrations, which the court has never upheld. The defendants in recent cases were young and not radicalized, and the police have not managed to arrest those who commit violent acts.
LaThe great severity once morest the demonstrators demanded by the ministers of the interior Gérald Darmanin and justice Éric Dupond-Moretti, just like their silence or their denials regarding police violence, give headaches to the magistrates. Whether it is the prosecutors and substitutes responsible for monitoring police custody and deciding who will be prosecuted among those arrested, or the judges responsible for convicting or releasing during immediate appearance hearings .
On the front line, as during the social movements once morest the Labor law and that of the “yellow vests”, it is in particular the Parisian magistrates and magistrates who are worried, once once more, regarding the mass of people arrested without reason or for trifles (knowing that real thugs run fast and rarely get caught). They note, at the same time, the very low number of prosecutions once morest police officers who are perpetrators of illegitimate violence.
The Parisian section of the Syndicat de la magistrature (SM, classified on the left) has thus just sent a letter to the prosecutor of the Republic of Paris, Laure Beccuau, of which Mediapart has taken note. Dated March 22, this missive has so far not received a response.
“We would like to share with you today our deep concern regarding the important issues with which justice, and more particularly the Paris court, is confronted in the context of the social protest of the pension reform which has been reflected for several days through demonstrations and spontaneous gatherings, especially in Paris”writes the SM.
“We can only note, in view of the journalistic reports associated with the videos recorded in real time by those present, and deplore, that these demonstrations are the subject of policing practices which very strongly question as to their legality, and to an instrumentalization of the measure of deprivation of liberty which constitutes police custody for the sole purpose of maintaining order.continues the magistrates’ union.
“The abusive nature of the use of police custody, obviously having the sole purpose of temporarily removing demonstrators from the place of demonstration, is evident from the discrepancy between the massive number of police custody measures and the limited number of legal follow-up given to these measures […]. [La presse] echoes, with social networks, violent behavior of members of the police vis-à-vis demonstrators or people present on the scene, behavior that can only strongly question. »
The magistrates and magistrates of the Parisian SM greet “vigilance and involvement” of their parquet colleagues who “ensure the protection of individual freedoms and respect for the rules of procedure, by carrying out the “sorting” mentioned above, which is essential in these circumstances». But they add this:
“If this control in the followingmath is essential, it seems to us that it would be just as imperative for the judicial authority that you represent, Madam Prosecutor, to be able to remind those responsible for policing policy that the deprivation of liberty constituted by police custody can only be used in compliance with the criteria strictly defined by law, namely for the strict requirements of the investigations relating to the offenses observed, and in any case not for the sole purpose of setting aside. »
It would be imperative for the judicial authority to be able to remind those responsible for policing policy that the deprivation of liberty constituted by police custody can only be used in compliance with the criteria strictly defined by law.
The Magistrates’ Union
Finally, the SM addresses the other annoying subject. “We would also like, in the face of reports of acts of violence committed by law enforcement officials during these demonstrations and gatherings, which can only be of great concern to us, just like you, we are sure of it, that you tell us what are the answers provided by your prosecution, and in particular that you can tell us how many investigations have been entrusted to the IGPN, if judicial information has been or will be opened as well as the criteria governing these openings “,asks the magistrates’ union to the Paris prosecutor.
Solicited by Mediapart, the Paris prosecutor’s office essentially indicates that it has too much work to self-seize police violence revealed by the media. The only exception: the video, which has gone viral, of the young man who was punched by a police officer near a kiosk. “We cannot do an exhaustive monitoring of everything that circulates on social networkswe explain. “We need an article 40 [un signalement effectué par un fonctionnaire dans le cadre de ses fonctions – ndlr] or a complaint. »
This Friday morning, the Paris prosecutor’s office listed 14 IGPN investigations opened since March 7. A number that is growing rapidly. In addition, 127 police custody followed the monster demonstration on Thursday March 23 in the streets of the capital.
“We had a hearing dedicated to the processing of files regarding people who demonstrated on March 20 and 21”testifies to Mediapart a magistrate who sat in immediate appearance in recent days. “We had to deal with nine cases. Six were sent back to April 18 so that they might prepare their defence, three were tried. For all of these cases, the prosecution requested judicial review with a ban on demonstrations. » Result for the three cases judged? Very meager: a sentence of community service, a suspended sentence of 2 months in prison and an acquittal.
“These sentences give you an idea of the substance of the chargestestifies this magistrate, unrelated to the SM. The prosecution received a circular [d’Éric Dupond-Moretti – ndlr] and obviously seems to apply it with great precision, without requiring penalties as severe as the minister would like…”
He adds : “We note that the prohibition to demonstrate is a judicial obligation almost systematically required by the prosecution, but the court has never pronounced it. » Why ? “Because it was not demonstrated that the individual had come to the demonstration with the aim of committing violence. Clearly, our position would have been different if it had been black blocks, which was not the case. »
The defendants are far, according to him, from resembling the description made by Gérald Garmanin and his services. “On the profile, we see that the respondents were very young. They were all perfectly integrated, one was even destined to be normalien. No desocialized or radicalized profile. Obviously, the police do not manage to arrest those who break “concludes this magistrate.
The concerns raised by the Parisian magistrates and magistrates regarding the mass arrests and police violence during recent protests are ones that should not be ignored. The use of police custody must comply with the criteria strictly defined by law, and violence by law enforcement officials must be fully investigated and prosecuted. The strict enforcement of laws should not be used to justify overly harsh penalties and restrictions on peaceful protestors. The role of the judiciary is crucial in ensuring the protection of individual freedoms and the rule of law. We must continue to monitor and hold accountable those responsible for upholding these fundamental values.
