The rebellious deputies and environmentalists announced on Monday April 17 that they were filing an appeal before the Constitutional Council against the text of the government’s law “relating to the Olympic and Paralympic Games [JOP] of 2024”, considering that certain security measures contravene the“individualization of penalties” and at “right to privacy”.
The text provides for a controversial experiment: using images from cameras and drones to feed algorithms that would automatically alert the authorities of a potentially risky event (crowd movement, abandonment of luggage, etc.). But the list of events to watch will be fixed later.
Experimentation could begin as soon as it is promulgated and concern the “sporting, recreational or cultural events” of magnitude. It should theoretically end on March 31, 2025, beyond the Olympic Games (July 26-August 11) and Paralympic Games (August 28-September 8). “This device seriously infringes the fundamental freedoms to come and go [et] to demonstrate”criticize the elected officials in their appeal, which Agence France-Presse (AFP) was able to consult, after information from the Huffington Post. “Such dangerous experimentation need not extend (…) Beyond the Olympics »write the applicants, certain that the event will serve as a springboard to perpetuate this video surveillance.
They worry that an algorithm might consider “that certain characteristics such as particular clothing or skin color are[ie]nt more likely to be associated with the risk sought”fearful “a potentially discriminatory and racist practice”.
Fear of the deployment of body scanners
The bill also provides for a reinforcement of the anti-doping arsenal, with genetic tests to detect forms of gene doping. But the absence of consent constitutes, according to these deputies, an attack on ” private life “ and to “individual freedom”.
The elected officials also denounce the planned extension of the possibilities of conducting administrative investigations, in particular before the assignment of temporary workers in certain sectors.
The access of participants (with the exception of spectators) and accredited persons to the competition sites and fan-zones may be subject to this investigation. But the scope of this last measure, defined by decree, “is not limited in time and could cover a large number of events”according to opponents, who see it as a ground of unconstitutionality.
Also in their sights: the possibility of deploying body scanners, which they consider disproportionate and contrary to the right to privacy.
Finally, they denounce the creation of offenses repressing the entries “by force or by fraud” in sports grounds, in recidivism or in meetings, and entrances to the grounds under the same conditions, considering that the article does not sufficiently specify the types of behavior targeted.