Second round for the “dropouts” under the gilding of the Court of Cassation. The highest French court examined this Wednesday the appeal of environmental activists convicted of having stolen in 2019, in town halls, portraits of Emmanuel Macron, in Paris, and in the regions of Valence and Strasbourg. A “nonviolent action”carried out with an uncovered face, and which aimed to “denouncing the government’s climate inaction”recall Cécile Marchand and Rémi Donaint, from the ANV-COP21 network behind the initiative.
In a decision of September 22, the Court of Cassation, seized by the “dropouts” of Bordeaux, Lyon, and Ain, considered that their gesture could fall under “freedom of speech” and thus quashed their judgment on appeal. This time, the objective goes further. “All over France, people have been tried for having seized these presidential portraits. But, even though the facts are almost identical, convictions or acquittals vary greatly from one court to another.exposes Me Ronald Maman, who represents the group of Parisian activists. The Court of Cassation must be able to determine a reading grid to harmonize these decisions.
“No, it’s not going to be anarchy”
The twelve dropouts in question this Wednesday were sentenced on appeal for “meeting theft” to fines of 200 to 500 euros, sometimes suspended. Several of them were present on Wednesday, stuck tight between law students and journalists at the back of the criminal chamber. The portraits had not only been removed but also recovered for use during protests. “It was a question of symbolically removing the President to confront him with climate change”insists Ronald Maman, who wishes to show that this action “would never have had the impact it had if the portraits had only been taken down.”
With his colleague, Me Paul Mathonnet, counsel for the Strasbourg and Valence activists, they pleaded for the Court to recognize once again that their action falls under the “freedom of expression” while doing “advance the decision of September 22”. Ronald Maman insists: “You need to deepen your case law, specify a reading grid for judges so that they can rule on the basis of precise criteria”, in matters related to activism. “Our society is sufficiently pluralistic, solid, to control, manage this type of political action”abounded Paul Mathonnet before adding: “No, there is no Pandora’s box. No, it’s not going to be anarchy.”
“Criminalization of militant action”
The two Advocates General for their part called for the appeals to be dismissed, considering in particular that the courts of appeal had verified that there was no infringement of the fundamental right of freedom of expression. “The fact of winning a portrait of the Head of State is not demonstrative of his inertia on climate issues. There must be a link between the offense and what is denounced”, argued the second, in charge of the Parisian file. According to him it is only “a means of attracting attention”. “The message does not make sense. One could very well imagine that it is an act that reflects the admiration of the President of the Republic “. The Court of Cassation will deliver its decision on May 18.
“We hope that then all the courts that try similar facts will be forced to ask themselves whether or not something as serious as global warming can legitimize a crime. Because no, it is not a simple “meeting robbery””, hammer as in one voice Rémi Donaint and Cécile Marchand of the ANV-COP21 network. In the background, another fight, much larger, is being played out, which they describe together at Freed. That of the “criminalization of militant action”of “bullying” of those who walk on the ground of civil disobedience. “A movement that is growing and worries us”and against which also “we must act”.