After the candidate on the list of La France rebellious to Europeans, Rima Hassan, it is the turn of Mathilde Panot to be summoned by the courts for “apology of terrorism”. This summons follows the opening of an investigation into condoning terrorism following a press release from the Parliament LFI group published on October 7, a few hours after the start of the Hamas attack in Israel.
Comments that fall within the scope of the law
At issue: the comments made in this press release, comparing the Hamas attack as “an armed offensive by Palestinian forces”, with “the Israeli occupation policy” in the West Bank. “No summons, no intimidation of any nature whatsoever will prevent us from protesting against the ongoing genocide against the Palestinian people,” wrote the leader of the rebel group in the National Assembly, on the X platform, formerly Twitter.
Questioned this Wednesday morning on the set of La Grande interview, the senator from Vendée and president of the Republicans in the Senate, was very firm regarding the positions of La France insoumise. “The apology for terrorism is something very particular. It is not enough to glorify terrorism, it is enough to justify it to fall within the scope of the law.”
“The rebellious elected officials are the first to condemn one or the other”
“Can we imagine, for example, that in France, certain politicians did not want to characterize the Bataclan as acts of terrorists? This is what happened with LFI and in particular with Madame Panot”, he regrets. “But what I see is that this radical left never ceases to drift from leftism to Islamism, but also through anti-Zionism which is often in reality disguised anti-Semitism. We have a real problem. This radical left embraces, in reality, one by one, all the anti-Republican struggles.
Bruno Retailleau regrets the judicialization of politics, of which the elected representatives of La France insoumise are the first to support it, he judges. “What I observe is that the rebellious elected officials are the first to condemn one or the other. So, now, it’s back to the sender,” he concludes.