news.yahoo.com . . .


The French Constitutional Council has approved a law that criminalizes the filming or broadcasting of acts of violence by people other than professional journalists. The law could lead to the imprisonment of eyewitnesses who film acts of police violence, or operators of Web sites publishing the images, one French civil liberties group warned on Tuesday.

The council chose an unfortunate anniversary to publish its decision approving the law, which came exactly 16 years after Los Angeles police officers beating Rodney King were filmed by amateur videographer George Holliday on the night of March 3, 1991. The officers’ acquittal at the end on April 29, 1992 sparked riots in Los Angeles.

If Holliday were to film a similar scene of violence in France today, he could end up in prison as a result of the new law, said Pascal Cohet, a spokesman for French online civil liberties group Odebi. And anyone publishing such images could face up to five years in prison and a fine of €75,000 (US$98,537), potentially a harsher sentence than that for committing the violent act.

Senators and members of the National Assembly had asked the council to rule on the constitutionality of six articles of the Law relating to the prevention of delinquency. The articles dealt with information sharing by social workers, and reduced sentences for minors. The council recommended one minor change, to reconcile conflicting amendments voted in parliament. The law, proposed by Minister of the Interior Nicolas Sarkozy, is intended to clamp down on a wide range of public order offenses. During parliamentary debate of the law, government representatives said the offense of filming or distributing films of acts of violence targets the practice of “happy slapping,” in which a violent attack is filmed by an accomplice, typically with a camera phone, for the amusement of the attacker’s friends.

The broad drafting of the law so as to criminalize the activities of citizen journalists unrelated to the perpetrators of violent acts is no accident, but rather a deliberate decision by the authorities, said Cohet. He is concerned that the law, and others still being debated, will lead to the creation of a parallel judicial system controlling the publication of information on the Internet.

The government has also proposed a certification system for Web sites, blog hosters, mobile-phone operators and Internet service providers, identifying them as government-approved sources of information if they adhere to certain rules. The journalists’ organization Reporters Without Borders, which campaigns for a free press, has warned that such a system could lead to excessive self censorship as organizations worried about losing their certification suppress certain stories.

That is fucking unbelievable.
Can anyone say Police State?

Where are the stinkies bragging about their freedoms in the nanny state. ???


Baaaa Baaaa wake up stinkie sheeple.

Vote for Royal.. she will fix everything comrades

If nobody sees it, it's not happening, right? What a fucking useless country.

The government has also proposed a certification system for Web sites, blog hosters, mobile-phone operators and Internet service providers, identifying them as government-approved sources of information if they adhere to certain rules.

Welcome to the soviet republik of flanch

The government has also proposed a certification system for Web sites, blog hosters, mobile-phone operators and Internet service providers, identifying them as government-approved sources of information if they adhere to certain rules.

Do you understand now why the majority of French are like Piss and Shit, Al-Lunatic or USSA?

One more big step down the road to complete socialist police state. And because of their delusions of superiority, the moron frogs will likely go smiling and condescending all the way into the gulag.

bump froggies bump

I look forward to Atlantic's explanation of how restricting such reporting to State media organs makes France a freer place than the US.

During parliamentary debate of the law, government representatives said the offense of filming or distributing films of acts of violence targets the practice of “happy slapping,” in which a violent attack is filmed by an accomplice, typically with a camera phone, for the amusement of the attacker’s friends.

Absurd reasoning. Violent attacks are against the law. Instead of prosecuting authors of violent attacks, they are adding a law that somehow by making happy slapping "more forbidden" when filmed is supposed to reduce the number of violations.

In short the reasoning is that is something that is forbidden still happens, you just have to forbid it more to make it disappear. What a bloody nonsense.

Meanwhile, out goes the freedom of expression. Amazing.

Prescott,

Sounds like gun control freaks logic, doesn't it? "let restrict and punish those who obey the law"

What so the journalists are not going to be able to tell the truth? Wow that has NEVER happend before in France! (well except for all those other times!)






Fuck the French media! (liarers and cheaters the lot of them!)

« Art. 222-43-2. – Est constitutif d’un acte de complicité des atteintes volontaires à l’intégrité de la personne prévues par les articles 222-1 à 222-14-1 et 222-23 à 222-31 et est puni des peines prévues par ces articles le fait d’enregistrer sciemment par quelque moyen que ce soit, sur tout support que ce soit, des images relatives à la commission de ces infractions.

« Le fait de diffuser l’enregistrement de telles images est puni de cinq ans d’emprisonnement et 75 000 € d’amende.

« Le présent article n’est pas applicable lorsque l’enregistrement ou la diffusion résulte de l’exercice normal d’une profession ayant pour objet d’informer le public ou est réalisé afin de servir de preuve en justice. »

Here is the text.

I agree it's not a good law. But...
The very last sentence (in bold) allow "citizen journalism" as you call it.

RC

the iron curtain is slowly being pulled over french...

French Constitutional Council has approved a law

So am I to understand that a "council" can actually change constitutional law in france?

Yet one more piece of the puzzle of how
(1) a decaying former democracy protects the enemy on the backs of honest but soft people,
(2) the failed state suppresses evidence of its incompetence
HOW ABOUT SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS? WILL THEY BE BANNED NEXT??

So am I to understand that a "council" can actually change constitutional law in france?

Oh, yes....the gov't there can do pretty much as it likes. In free countries they rule by decree, and the rulers change thier constitution at will via a hand-picked committee, unlike fascist dictatorships like the US.

What violence?

The very last sentence (in bold) allow "citizen journalism" as you call it.

No it does not. It says that when the recording or the distribution of the tape was carried out to serve as juridical proof, the interdiction doesn't apply. Your quote says nothing about "citizen journalism". Worse, by not explicitely excluding citizen journalism from the scope of this law, it forbids citizen journalism, at least where reporting violence is concerned.

In other words, if you see a crime happening from your office window and you film it, you might escape prosecution by claiming you filmed it for use in a tribunal. But if there is no tribunal because the police choses to ignore the crime (think of Sarkozy's crime stats), you don't have the right to let your countrymen know what happened by posting your footage, and you could end up in front of a tribunal if you did, instead of the person you filmed committing violence.

I agree it's not a good law.

Glad you got that part.

it is even fascism.

first time i hear that .

FUCK THEM

What is the French word for Gestapo ?

One of the saddest things about this story is the fact that the media in France, because it is either state-owned, leftist-driven, or threatened by the growing popularity of citizen journalism, is probably not going to make too much of a fuss over this.

The law could lead to the imprisonment of eyewitnesses who film acts of police violence, or operators of Web sites publishing the images,

France has just taken the lead in suppression of free expression and truth, surpassing the efforts of China, Russia, Cuba, Zimbabwe and North Korea!

France has again become a world leader!

it is the work of sarkosy . Clearly.

Absurd reasoning. Violent attacks are against the law. Instead of prosecuting authors of violent attacks, they are adding a law that somehow by making happy slapping "more forbidden" when filmed is supposed to reduce the number of violations.

In short the reasoning is that is something that is forbidden still happens, you just have to forbid it more to make it disappear. What a bloody nonsense.

Meanwhile, out goes the freedom of expression. Amazing.

Complete strawman argument.

Par ailleurs, votre commission vous propose par un amendement de compléter cet article afin d'incriminer le fait d'enregistrer et de diffuser les images concernant la commission d'infractions de violence.

Cette pratique récente, connue sous le nom de « happy slapping »64(*), se développe en effet dans des proportions inquiétantes.

Elle consiste à filmer à l'aide de moyens divers comme les téléphones mobiles équipés de caméras une personne ou un groupe de personnes se précipitant sur une victime qui ne soupçonne pas l'imminence d'un assaut. L'objectif final est de diffuser les images ainsi enregistrées.

Si l'idée de filmer une infraction n'est pas nouvelle, la banalisation et la disponibilité de caméras vidéo encouragent la planification des agressions et les rendent facilement diffusables.

Les actes de violence perpétrés dans le cadre du « happy slapping » dépassent la simple gifle. Ils peuvent, dans certains cas, aboutir au décès de la victime ou concerner des viols.

L'amendement proposé par votre commission ne concerne pas les agresseurs physiques de la victime dans la mesure où il existe déjà des textes réprimant les infractions liées aux actes violents.

En revanche, il tend à incriminer le comportement de celui qui se borne à filmer la scène violente lorsqu'il ne peut pas être considéré comme l'instigateur de l'agression à laquelle il ne participe pas directement. Actuellement, il ne saurait être poursuivi en qualité de complice. Tout au plus pourrait-on lui reprocher de n'avoir pas empêché la commission de l'infraction, mais cela suppose qu'il était capable de le faire.

Il apparaît donc nécessaire de sanctionner le comportement de celui qui filme des agressions, en prévoyant qu'un tel comportement constituera une forme particulière de complicité des actes de tortures, des viols et des agressions sexuelles.

Définir ces faits comme des actes de complicité permettra d'en réprimer les auteurs comme les auteurs directs des violences elles-mêmes. Ainsi, les circonstances aggravantes encourues, comme celles liées à la qualité de la victime, seront applicables.

www.senat.fr . . . (bottom)

----

So am I to understand that a "council" can actually change constitutional law in france?

Oh, yes....the gov't there can do pretty much as it likes. In free countries they rule by decree, and the rulers change thier constitution at will via a hand-picked committee, unlike fascist dictatorships like the US.

*sigh*
Educate yourselves for a change:
Constitutional Council
Constitution of France