- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
French courts have been imposing disproportionately severe sentences for minor offenses, including 10 months in prison for stealing a can of Red Bull and one year for a homeless boy with schizophrenia caught looting a luxury store. The overwhelmed courts rush cases, provide minimal time for defendants, and prioritize punishment under the instruction of the Justice Minister. Furthermore, the French government is censoring social media and justifying it by claiming to protect public order, but it infringes upon free speech and mirrors tactics used by authoritarian regimes. The justice system exhibits a double standard, favoring the privileged, and creates a class divide, leading to unrest. Ironically, the government compares itself to oppressive nations while undermining democratic principles.
You must log in or register to comment.
Not defending the judges’ decisions here, but…
Not Protestors; Rioters and Looters
These are all very heavy sentences. No arguments from me there. But, tell the story without putting a spin on it.
Remember that in France it is civil law and judges study the case and make decisions. Lawyers aren’t pleasing cases and objecting as much as in North America like we see in Hollywood movies or on Netflix.
Cases mentioned:
- Guy gets 10 months in prison for stealing a Redbull [Source in French]: Yes. Based on different laws, he was found guilty of looting, among other things. He was made an example of. Harsh. Not his first rodeo…
- 6 months for stealing fruit. Cannot find source. Looting, not protesting.
- Looting a Louis Vuitton store. 1 year in prison. Homeless guy with schizophrenia. Said he was looking for food.
- 1 year of prison. Was found in the store after the looting… picking up the leftovers.
After giving 4 examples states that he gave 5 examples. Says the courts are “cramming as many cases per day”… Yes, that’s how they do. Makes false claims (says they are told to plead guilty, we can’t know that, says they have no lawyers, provides no proof).
I’m sorry, but I cannot call this independent journalism. This is just 12 minutes of false connections and misleading or manipulated content. It is not news.
Fact: the judges handed out harsh punishments based on the current laws because these individuals were caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
In France, the truth depends on the time, the place, and the context. Judges have to rule based on that. There are options to appeal. But, if it’s 4 in the morning, for example, and you’re in the Louis Vuitton shop checking out handbags on the same night as riots, you’ll get the book thrown at you.
The guy who made this video could have told the straight facts, no spin, just facts, and it would have been a stronger argument.
Also…
Furthermore, the French government is censoring social media
They have been suggesting that, haven’t done it yet.
I mean every example you listed is fundamentally a property crime. I don’t see how property crimes could possibly translate into such long prison sentences. Unless they’re using weapons and attacking or threatening people it just doesn’t make any sense. “Looting” is an arbitrary definition that seems very ripe for abuse by a government that is already out of control. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yE_Om13VpQw
Well, penal law here can be very precise.
A French article (the one linked to above) about the Redbull case says
On Monday 3 July, the Marseilles court tried this man for acts of “burglary in a group”, “in a state of legal recidivism for having been convicted”, in February 2022, “for similar or assimilated acts”. According to the lawyer, this previous record alone cannot explain the severity of the sentence imposed. Especially as her client, who was under a committal order, was taken directly into custody after the hearing. “This sentence may seem harsh but, in my opinion, it is contextualised in relation to the riots. The judge’s aim is to restore public order and social peace while deterring those who might be tempted to get involved in such reprehensible acts.” She added: “It’s obvious that if it hadn’t been for the riots, my client would have been eligible for a new plea bargain.” And therefore to a potentially lower sentence. On Tuesday 4 July, she indicated her willingness to consider his request for a reduced sentence.
All about the context here in France. Only serious cases get to plead their case to a jury (murder, etc.) so this guy had zero chances. Maybe less than zero.
Unless they’re using weapons and attacking or threatening people it just doesn’t make any sense.
Maybe they are. OP’s linked video isn’t exactly providing detailed references to the court cases he’s talking about.
stealing luxury handbags is based
This is fucked up! It is kind of scary how even here in Germany the news coverage is skewed in favour of Macron recently. Kind of framing it as a migrant revolt. You only hear about the riots in france but no background info about why it is happening and what measures are taken. At the same time you hear about France starting to spy on citizens smartphones and just ask yourself what the fuck is happening. Thanks for the translation!
The other thing that has become completely discarded in the narrative is the fact that this instability began with Macron’s antidemocratic cram-through of laws dismantling France’s social state.
His increase of the retirement age from 62 to 64, bringing it more in line with its EU neighbors (though still below all but two of them)? France’s constitutional court had no problem with it. A bill to repeal the reform was proposed but failed to pass when a majority of representatives voted against it. This doesn’t seem terribly anti-democratic to me.
Note also that this retirement age increase wasn’t done for no reason. The pension system is suffering from more expenses and less revenue as the demographics of France tilt more toward the elderly. This was done to keep the pension system as a whole in the black.
His increase of the retirement age from 62 to 64
In Spain the right wing is floating the idea of increasing retirement age from 67 to… 72 or 74.
Basically a “retire never” situation.
The democratic way would have been to submit the bill to increase the retirement age to vote. It wasn’t voted. It was imposed.
The bill to repeal the reform wasn’t passed not because representatives voted against it. That’s not how it works. It didn’t pass because it didn’t gain enough votes. Because you would HAVE to vote AGAINST the assembly, which is not the same as voting against a law.
Then again, it wasn’t done to keep the pension system as a whole. It was done to alleviate corporate social funding. The pension system wasn’t lacking.
Sorry for the lack of sources, I’m on mobile. If you want them I can search for them.
As an example, in Germany, the age of retirement is now 67 (actually it’s 65.7, but will be gradually increased until 2029 to reach 67. So, for anyone born after 1964, it is 67.)
A migrant revolt? Some of them might be, but a lot of them were at least 2nd generation.
This article from The Atlantic explains a lot https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/07/france-social-inequality-mass-protests-riots-intensity/674636/
“A riot is the language of the unheard.” - A quote that always comes to mind for me.
I seriously respect how French citizens protest. They do not fuck around. Handing down a 10 month sentence for stealing a soft drink shows fear rather than decisiveness to me. Hopefully this brings about some positive change and these sentences all get commuted.
We had a similar situation in the UK following protests/riots in summer 2011. People caught up at the scene got attacked by police and layer sentenced, while someone who took a packet of chewing gum from an open shop front after the crows had dispersed was jailed for over a year. The Director of Public Prosecutions who oversaw this is now the leader of our “left wing” party…
Ultimately, state apparatuses are going to come down extremely hard on mass violent action because they represent a material threat to the state. Obviously these riots aren’t going to topple the 5th Republic, but if the state was seen to be unable to control them, or was forced to compromise with them through leniency, then it shows a weakness which makes this more likely in the future.
:(
