Second day of action against the cost of living: the Conseil d'État rules, the right to protest still needs defending

One week after the violence of 17 October, France is experiencing this Saturday a second phase of the mobilisation against the cost of living in an unprecedented climate. According to Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez, quoted by Europe 1, 70,000 police officers and gendarmes have been deployed, compared with 60,000 the previous week. According to franceinfo, 135 arrests had been made across the country by 1 pm, and Euronews reports that the minister was not then reporting any major incident.

The facts: a day framed by the prefects and by the courts

The framework for this day was set on Thursday 22 October at the Élysée, after a Security Council meeting. As reported by Public Sénat, Emmanuel Macron then laid down a very firm line.

The general recommendation is that there should be no demonstrations in the coming days — Emmanuel Macron

The head of state added that union marches would be offered alternative routes, and that other gatherings would be banned "wherever we can". He described the events of 17 October, which had drawn between 550,000 and 800,000 people according to figures reported in the press, as "political and even seditious" acts.

Several associations, including the Ligue des droits de l'Homme and the Syndicat de la magistrature, along with seven left-wing parties (Les Écologistes, La France insoumise, the Parti socialiste, the Parti communiste, Debout, L'Après and Génération.s) took the matter to the Conseil d'État. According to L'Express, the judge in urgent proceedings rejected these appeals on Friday evening. Her reasoning is precise: the president's remarks constitute neither a general decision to ban nor an instruction to prefects, and each prefect remains bound to assess, gathering by gathering, the risk of disorder.

On the ground, prefects have made extensive use of this power. According to Euronews and Noovo, all demonstrations are banned from 10 am to 11 pm in the city centre of Lyon, where more than 150 shops had been damaged or looted on 17 October. In the Bouches-du-Rhône, gatherings are prohibited in towns of more than 10,000 inhabitants, with some exceptions, and only one demonstration is authorised in Marseille. France Bleu reports that the centre of Bordeaux is closed to marches, including the one organised by the joint union front, and that the prefect of the Gard has banned all gatherings. In Paris, the administrative court upheld the new route imposed by the prefecture, from Porte d'Italie to Porte de Vincennes, instead of the historic route between Bastille and Nation.

The positions at stake

The government embraces a precautionary approach. Sébastien Lecornu judged "the level of threat" to be high, pointing to the ultra-left and to criminality, according to Euronews. The argument deserves to be heard: smashed windows, emptied shops and the burnt town hall of Limoges have nothing to do with democratic expression.

The unions, for their part, dispute the method more than the security objective. The joint union front considers that the change of route in Paris creates, in its words reported by Euronews, "the conditions for disorder rather than for calm". On the left, those who brought the case before the Conseil d'État denounce an abuse of presidential power. Experts interviewed by Euronews also question the idea that the violence of 17 October matched the usual modus operandi of the ultra-left, which calls for caution about the characterisations put forward by the executive.

Analysis: republican order cannot be decreed by words

The Conseil d'État's decision is not a blank cheque. On the contrary, it says that the president's words do not, in law, amount to a ban. Constitutional law expert Benjamin Morel recalled this week in Public Sénat that a general ban on demonstrating is not possible. The Paris administrative court showed as much on 22 October by overturning, shortly before it began, the ban on a student rally. The judge is playing his role as guardian, and that is a good thing.

But the political question remains. In the Gaullist tradition, the authority of the state is measured by its ability to guarantee both order and freedoms, not to suspend the latter in the name of the former. When entire departments close their city centres, the risk is twofold: suggesting that the street belongs to rioters, and making peaceful demonstrators, workers, pensioners and high school students, pay for the wrongs of a violent minority.

Above all, this security apparatus does not address the cause of the anger. The movement has grown around the cost of living and wages that fail to keep up. No ban will lower the price of the shopping basket or of rents. A strong state is one that protects shops on a Saturday and opens, on Monday, a genuine social negotiation.

Conclusion: moving beyond confrontation

Without waiting for the day's final toll, a proposal can be made: that every banning order be reasoned, published and limited to what is strictly necessary, and that the government commit, in parallel, to bringing unions and employers together on wages and purchasing power before the end of the month. Does the Republic still have the means to reconcile everyone's security with each person's right to be heard? That is the question raised by this 24 October.

Article written with the help of artificial intelligence.