The global landscape of policing has never been rosy. Stories of excessive police force are often in the news, particularly in the US, where such excessive force results in the death of several black persons. The case of the police in South Asia is no different. Police excesses, highhandedness and ‘crime control strategies’ often receive media attention. Considering these, there have been different perspectives on the very existence of the profession of policing, such as in Alex Vitale’s book, ‘End of Policing’. These perspectives also show that one of the biggest governance challenges of our times is the ‘internal security’ of states. In this context, the recent police shootings in France must be studied and explored to understand how the police and policing operate in France, as well as what can be learnt from these incidents.
Latest Police Shooting
On 27 June 2023, at about 8 am, three police officers on a motorbike were chasing a car with three passengers at Nanterre, a suburb of Paris. Later, the vehicle was stopped forcefully, and the police officers fired at the passengers. One of the passengers, Nahel, aged 17, was killed. The facts show that the incident was related to the traffic stop. It may be noted that after the incident, the police officer who fired at the person has been indicted for homicide and over 45000 police officers have been deployed to quell the riots.
In response to the killing, many people went out into the streets to protest. As these protests became fiercer and more intense, the French police responded with more force. By the fourth day of protests, the police had arrested close to one thousand rioters. It may be noted that throughout these four days, the unions of police officers (Alliance Police France) kept observing the developments, issuing interesting statements in response. An example of this is the statement issued on 30 June 2023 which was quite reactionary. Some excerpts (translated in English) are as follows:
“…Facing these savage hordes, asking for calm is no longer enough, it must be imposed! Restoring the republican order and putting the apprehended beyond the capacity to harm should be the only political signals to give. In the face of such exactions, the police family must stand together. Our colleagues, like the majority of citizens, can no longer bear the tyranny of these violent minorities. The time is not for union action, but for combat against these “pests”. Surrendering, capitulating, and pleasing them by laying down arms are not the solutions in light of the gravity of the situation. All means must be put in place to restore the rule of law as quickly as possible. Once restored, we already know that we will relive this mess that we have been enduring for decades. For these reasons, Alliance Police Nationale and UNSA Police will take their responsibilities and warn the government from now on that at the end, we will be in action and without concrete measures for the legal protection of the Police, an appropriate penal response, significant means provided, the police will judge the extent of the consideration given. Today the police are in combat because we are at war. Tomorrow we will be in resistance and the government will have to become aware of it…”
Analysis
France is a developed nation with a solid economic base. It has a written constitution passed in 1958, which guarantees the Rights of Man as declared in the Declaration of Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789. There is nothing specific in its constitution about internal security. The history of the police and policing in France, as recorded on the French Ministry of Interior website, shows that the country’s internal security has always been somewhat unstable. Understanding France’s policing framework requires a closer look at how the country’s police organisations are structured.
Presently, two national police organisations cater to different jurisdictions and work under the control of the Ministry of Interior. The first is the Police Nationale (French National Police), which is responsible for policing in cities. It was constituted by law in 1966. The second is the Gendarmerie Police which secures rural and countryside areas with less than 20000 inhabitants. Municipal police organisations are also functional in some urban centres. Both police organisations provide training to police officers, which has been a characteristic feature of police in France. Indeed, the first police academy was established in France in 1883 – later upgraded to the Paris Institute of Criminology in 1922.
With this apparatus of internal security, the two police departments at the national level are vested with the authority to maintain order and control crime. In the recent police shooting case, two officers of the Police Nationale shot Nahel, a 17-year-old Muslim immigrant from Algeria. The victim’s profile, particularly his ethnicity, age and religion, attracted much attention and triggered intense public outrage. Another factor fuelling the protests is the language of the statements of the union of police officers (as excerpted above).
On a professional side, police officers note that the power to shoot was the product of some campaign by the police union against acts of terrorism and was advocated for years. Ultimately, the ability to use force (through weaponry) was granted to police by amending Article 435-1 of the French Penal Code in 2017. The article (reproduced hereunder) envisaged five situations in which police officers could use force:
“Art. L. 435-1.– In the performance of their duties and wearing their uniform or external and apparent insignia…, national police officers and national gendarmerie soldiers may, in addition to the cases mentioned in l. Article L. 211-9, to use their weapons in case of absolute necessity and in a strictly proportionate manner:
- When attacks on life or physical integrity are made against them or against others or when armed persons threaten their life or physical integrity or that of others;
- When, after two summonses given aloud, they cannot otherwise defend the premises they occupy or the persons entrusted to them;
- When, immediately after two summonses addressed aloud, they cannot compel to stop, other than by the use of arms, persons who seek to escape their custody or their investigations and who are likely to perpetrate, in their flight, attacks on their life or physical integrity or those of others;
- When they cannot immobilize, other than by the use of arms, vehicles, boats or other means of transport, whose drivers do not obey the order to stop and whose occupants are likely to perpetrate, in their flight, attacks on their life or physical integrity or those of others;
- With the exclusive aim of preventing the reiteration, in a short time, of one or more murders or attempted murders which have just been committed, when they have real and objective reasons to consider that this reiteration is likely based on the information they have at the time they use their weapons.”
In the Nahel case, the police officers used their powers under clause 4 of the Article. However, this legal exception has not shielded the police officers; according to media reports, the officer who shot Nahel has been charged with murder. Some police experts also argue that after the new amendments were introduced, the requisite training of officers was not carried out as per the new law. In any case, the incident has reflected poorly on the French police system and the governance of police structures in the country.
Concluding Remarks
The use of force is a very specialised area within police studies. Efforts must be made to ensure that the use of force remains limited. Different countries have implemented various solutions for this. Some countries have tried to control the level of militarisation within the police – admittedly, the police is an offshoot of and has evolved from the military. Another approach has been to allow small arms for police with high thresholds for the legal use of force, supplemented with effective police accountability mechanisms.
The situation in France has been exacerbated by the illegal use of force but by the police unions, whose statements indicate that they have used the occasion for their own organisational interests. Globally, there is not much variation in the opinions within police forces on the use of force against terrorists (whatever definition of terrorism is used). Still, for instances such as these, views remain varied. The standard is to use force only sparingly and for the public good. The French Declaration on the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 notes:
“The security of the rights of man and of the citizen requires public military forces. These forces are, therefore, established for the good of all and not for the personal advantage of those to whom they shall be entrusted.”
Thus, bearing this in mind, it is time that police organisations be used ‘for the good of all’ by discouraging violence in society and by governmental structures.
Great conclusion! All comes down to “Public Good” and not personal advantage. Service out to be like that and that is the essence of it.