There has been a substantial number of new additions to security laws around the world. However, not all of these new additions are welcomed by the public. Many of these new additions are controversial and spark much debate. Two new security laws which have proven to provoke controversy are Hong Kong and France’s new security laws. The media has recently been overwhelmed with opinions, discussions and questions regarding these two countries and the new laws which they are in the process of implementing.
As there is too much information and debate to squish these two topics into one article, we will first be focusing on France’s new security law this month and then next month we will be taking a look at Hong Kong’s new security law.
What Is It?
France’s new global security law includes draft legislation that will potentially ban filming police activities, and which also increases police’s freedom to use drone surveillance. This proposed security law has already been approved by the National Assembly and subsequently waits to be further approved by the French Senate in March. This new security law has been deemed to be a necessity by the French government as police officers have recently become targets of attacks via social media as calls for violence against them have been launched.
Why Is It Controversial?
The new security law is controversial as article 24 of the new law bans the publication of pictures of police in certain circumstances and article 22 gives police greater use of surveillance drones. Article 22 of the new security law allows extended surveillance specifically of demonstrators in the name of security and in the fight against terrorism.It has been stated that offenders of article 22 and 24 could face up to a year in prison and they could also be fined 45 000 Euros.
Many people have deemed the new security laws as incompatible with basic rights as article 24 is a threat to press freedom as serious restrictions are being placed on what the public can film and what they are not allowed to film. Article 22 of the new security law has also been deemed as incompatible with basic human rights as it infringes upon the right that the public has to privacy, the right to freedom to gather peacefully and lastly the right to freedom of expression.
The controversy which this draft bill has created has manifested into protest action around the country. Protest action first transpired around November 2020, when more than 133 000 people took to the streets to show their anger and disapproval of the new bill.
This protest action subsequently intensified after footage materialized of three white policemen beating black music producer, Michel Zecler in his studio in Paris. The attack reportedly began because of a dispute over whether Zecler was complying with the Covid-19 pandemic requirements of wearing a face mask. Officers later admitted that their violence against the music producer was unwarranted, however, they were acting out of panic after Mr Zecler resisted them.
The attack on Zecler was one of three incidents of police violence that occurred in the same week and which were all caught on film. These filmed instances of police violence highlight the need for why filming police officers exist. Michel Zecler stated that without the footage of the attack, he would currently be in prison. It has also been stated that if article 24 were in force at the time of the attack on Zecler, then the video of the attack would not have been able to be made public. The police suspects who were involved in the Zecler beating are facing charges of “intentional violence by a person holding authority”.
Former interior minister, Christophe Castaner, showed support of the new bill by stating that the articles have been drawn up to better protect the forces of law and order and to preserve the freedom of the press and the freedom to inform. Castaner further added that based on the unhappiness and discontentment that the public has with article 24, it would have to be re-written. Despite this promise, protesters and human right defenders are unconvinced that rephrasing the provision will make much improvement. Human rights experts have also supported the revision of the global security bill as they state that the bill will be incompatible with international human rights law. The human rights experts went even further to state that members of parliament need to do more than just rewriting the bill, they need to rethink the bill’s purpose as a whole. The experts highlighted the importance of the public being able to photograph and record police officers by saying that “images of police abuse captured by the public play a vital role in oversight of public institutions, which is fundamental to the rule of law”.
Conclusion
France has previously been described as the “torchbearer of liberty” and the “defender of freedom of expression”, however, the creation of article 22 and 24 are sure signs that their title of being leading human rights empowerees is being abandoned. Hopefully, the decision made by the French senate in March regarding the bill redirects the country towards protecting human rights.
Commenti