Who should foot the bill for damages during violent protests in France? With the demonstrations against the “labor” law in 2016, the “yellow vest” movement in 2018 and 2019, the opposition to the pension reform in 2023, the urban riots in the summer of 2023, the clashes in New Caledonia or in Martinique in 2024, the amount of damage has increased considerably this last decade, exceeding one billion euros, for example, only due to the urban violence that occurred after the death of Nahel, in June 2023.
A discreet legal battle takes place before the administrative courts to compromise, or not, the financial responsibility of the State in the reimbursement of destroyed or damaged property. An apparently technical debate, but one that says a lot about French society, its relationship with social risks, the maintenance of order and the place of the State.
The law is, on its face, quite simple. The internal security code states that “the State is civilly responsible for damages and losses resulting from crimes and misdemeanors committed, with open force or violence, by armed or unarmed gatherings or gatherings, whether against people or property.”. Therefore, anyone who has suffered harm in this context has the right to appeal to the State, even when no fault has been established, provided that the latter, which rarely happens, is reimbursed by the perpetrators of the damage. caused.
This provision is old: in the French conception, social peace presupposes that the community as a whole assumes responsibility for the effects of maintaining order or order that has not been maintained. “The counterpart of the monopoly of legitimate violence granted to the State is that the State pays when it does not fulfill its minimum mission of protection”summarizes Eric Landot, lawyer specialized in public law. “It is an old system of responsibility, since the French Revolution, that allows the risks that freedom of demonstration entails to be collectivized”adds lawyer Georges Salon.
Appeals from dozens of banks
A review of recent decisions would make one pale in a liberal society; In reality, it is not debated in a society like France, where the State occupies a central place.
The inventory of convictions is impressive. Protective windows and surveillance cameras around the Eiffel Tower destroyed during the “yellow vest” movement on February 9, 2019? The State has just been sentenced to pay 392,000 euros to the insurer (Paris Administrative Court of Appeal, October 25). A construction crane set on fire on the Champs-Elysées avenue during another “act” of the “yellow vests”? 216,000 euros to the owner’s insurer (Paris administrative court, September 24). An intrusion by high school students and “yellow vests” into a Leclerc hypermarket in Tarn that led to its closure for two days? 31,000 euros in compensation to compensate for 7% of the lost margins (Administrative Court of Appeal of Toulouse, 1Ahem October). The Paris Convention Center degraded on 1Ahem December 2018? 37,000 euros to be paid by the taxpayer (Paris administrative court, June 4). A pharmacy looted on the Place de l’Etoile by the “yellow vests”? 41,000 euros in compensation. Damaged street furniture in Toulouse and Saint-Etienne? Respectively 59,000 euros and 102,000 euros. Rental company scooters destroyed in Paris during clashes? Almost 47,000 euros. A Qatari embassy vehicle damaged by protesters? 23,766 euros, etc.
You have 61.3% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
