The body considered that the alternative measures to closure, proposed by professionals, were “not likely to limit the risk of contamination”.
The Council of State rejected the appeal of the National Union of Discotheques and Leisure Places (SNDLL) against the closure of discotheques decided by the government, deeming it justified in view of a “clear degradation“Of the health situation and”inherent contamination risks»To dancing in closed spaces. Seized in the context of interim relief proceedings, the Council of State estimated Wednesday, two days after a public hearing, that the closure of these establishments from December 10 to January 6 was justified by “the objective of limiting the spread of the epidemic», Facing the fifth wave of Covid-19.
Read alsoJérémie Peltier: “The closing of nightclubs, a symbol of the decline of the party society”
Noting that “the health and epidemiological situation has deteriorated markedly for several weeks“Under the effect of the Delta and Omicron variants, the Council of State considers that”may translate, in the short term, into an increase in hospitalizations, including critical care“. But in nightclubs there are “risks of contamination inherent in a dance activity in closed spaces, including close physical contact in a festive atmosphere which cannot guarantee compliance with the rules of distancing and barrier gestures to avoid the transmission of the virus, which mainly takes place by droplets respiratory», Says the judgment.
SEE ALSO – The reopening of nightclubs conditional on the sanitary situation in January
No alternatives according to the Council of State
Thus the measures proposed by professionals to limit the spread of the epidemic – weekly and shortened opening, installation of air extractors, payment at the entrance to avoid the handling of cash in the room or at the bar …- , aren’t they “not such as to limit the risk of contamination attached to the dance activity itself», Says the Council of State. As for the alternative measures to the closure that could be taken – establish a gauge, limit the number of consumers and dancers on the dance floor, or even restrict the activity of nightclubs to that of bars, as proposed by the SNDLL union – they do not. would be “not as efficientHe continues.
Read alsoNightclubs: professionals pleaded their case before the Council of State to cancel the closure
Likewise, a regional ban would not have been adapted to an epidemiological situation with the characteristics “globally homogeneous on the national territory“. Finally, leaving other establishments open to the public does not in itself bring “violation of the principle of equality», Affirms the Council of State, refuting all the arguments of the union. In fact, the decree of December 7, 2021, he recalls, prohibits “all dance activities»Including in restaurants and bars.