La France Insoumise's proposed law on the apology of terrorism is unanimously opposed

POLITICS – Alone against all. With its proposed law aimed at repealing the defense of terrorism offenses in the Penal Code, rebellious France once again finds itself isolated on the political scene. Whether it is the right, the government, and even within the New Popular Front, the text of the LFI deputies does not pass.

The text carried by the Northern deputy Ugo Bernalicis was tabled on November 19 in the National Assembly. It plans to repeal the offense of apologizing for terrorism included in the Penal Code in 2014 to retain only that already provided for in the law of 1881. This, explains LFI, in order to fight “drifts” more and more numerous particularly in terms of legal proceedings, and which harm freedom of expression.

This text does not appear in the rebellious parliamentary niche of November 28 and is not included on the Assembly's agenda. It is therefore unlikely to be examined. Near the ParisianUgo Bernalicis explains that it is above all a “political positioning” movement aligned with expert positions. Jean-Luc Mélenchon's movement particularly evokes the former Paris anti-terrorism judge Marc Trévidic, a supporter of the toughening of the law in 2014, and who now believes that it “we should dare to turn back” facing a “totally misused use”. But on the political spectrum, few people join this line.

Migaud and Retailleau work together

In unison, several leaders from various sides evoked the memory of the attacks which affected France, Charlie Hebdo and the Bataclan in 2015 to the assassinations of Samuel Paty and Dominique Bernard. The LFI bill amounts to “that we can praise the Bataclan (…) justify the attacks”, accused MEP François-Xavier Bellamy on CNews this Monday – which is false, since such declarations will always fall under the law of 1881. The president of the Democratic deputies (MoDem) Marc Fesneau reminded him of the context in which this law was passed, recalling that it “aimed at expanding the capacities to act on the apology of terrorism. »

The controversy reached the government, where LR Minister of the Interior Bruno Retailleau criticized a proposal “unspeakable”. Aligned, for once, with his colleague from Justice Didier Migaud from the left. The Minister of Justice said “resolutely against” the repeal of the offense in the Penal Code, emphasizing that “freedom of expression has never allowed everything, there are limits to this freedom of expression”.

LFI dropped by the PS

Near the Parisianformer President François Hollande under whose mandate the law was passed also defended the legislative development. “ It does not call into question freedom of expression since it explicitly refers to press law and leaves the courts with discretion.” judged the one who became a PS deputy again. In agreement with the president of the Occitanie region or the deputy for Essonne Jérôme Guedj, all of whom are regularly at odds with rebellious France.

But even among the defenders of the NFP alliance, the text does not pass. “Nothing should trivialize terrorism and its apology. We do not support the proposal” rebels, very clearly declared the president of the PS group in the Assembly Boris Vallaud in Political Issues on November 24. He was joined a few hours later by the First Secretary of the PS, the deputy for Seine-et-Marne Olivier Faure who deplored a text which “purely repeals the offense of advocating terrorism” while “the definition only needs to be clarified to avoid deviations. »

False, replied in substance the national coordinator of France insoumise Manuel Bompard this Monday, November 25, regretting that “the meaning” of the bill is “distorted” because reduced to the abrogation of the offense in the Penal Code while forgetting that sanctions would still be possible under the law of 1881.

As a reminder, the law of July 29, 1881 on freedom of the press does not explicitly mention the word “terrorism”. On the other hand, it punishes with a fine of five years' imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros any person who has defended « crimes » divers, dont “war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of enslavement”. According to France Insoumise and certain jurists, this terminology is sufficient to encompass the apology of terrorism. The debate is therefore open but may never take place.

Also see on The HuffPost: