October 31 protest: the Conseil d'État sends the march to the edge of Paris, the freedom to demonstrate cannot become a concession

The facts

The legal tug-of-war lasted less than twenty-four hours. Late on the afternoon of Friday 30 October, the interim relief judge of the Paris administrative court, at the request of the Île-de-France inter-union coalition, suspended the police prefecture's order banning the declared route between Bastille and Nation, as reported by Entrevue and Sortiraparis. Immediately afterwards, Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez announced an appeal to the Conseil d'État. According to BFMTV, whose report was picked up by several media outlets on Saturday morning, the highest administrative court overturned the tribunal's decision during the night and approved the route imposed by the prefecture: departure at 2 p.m. from Porte de Bagnolet, arrival at Porte de Charenton, along the boulevards des Maréchaux. The detailed reasoning of the ruling was not yet known at the time of writing.

This third day of mobilisation in three weeks, against the high cost of living and the lack of resources for state education, is led by the inter-union coalition (CGT, FO, FSU, Solidaires, as well as FAGE, UNEF and Union étudiante), by the Union syndicale lycéenne and by a coordination of yellow vests who speak of an "act III", according to Public Sénat. Around 70,000 police officers and gendarmes are deployed across the country. In Paris, the prefecture has also imposed a curfew from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. in the République and Châtelet-Les Halles areas until 2 November. In Marseille, since no protest was declared, gatherings are banned; in Lyon, a large perimeter of the city centre is closed to marches.

The positions at stake

The government cites what it considers a "very high" risk of urban violence, according to Laurent Nuñez, with the day coinciding with Halloween. The memory of 17 October weighs heavily: Libération, quoted by Euronews, noted that turnout had far exceeded the ministry's forecasts, and sociologist Sébastian Roché spoke of a loss of control by the security forces. Emmanuel Macron himself acknowledged in Marseille, on 26 October, a lack of preparation that day, LCP reports. The head of State presented the off-centre march of 24 October as a model for future mobilisations, while recognising "legitimate demands" behind the movement.

The police prefecture also puts forward an economic argument. Its spokesperson, Hélène Denéchère, defended on RMC locations that are "easier to secure and less exposed for shopkeepers", according to Public Sénat. In the Senate, LR senator Olivier Paccaud agrees: in his view, the authorities logically choose the routes that are easiest to protect, in order to avoid further looting.

Necessity knows no law - Olivier Paccaud, LR senator for the Oise

On the other side, the unions denounce a disproportionate restriction. UNEF treasurer Clara Privé sums up the organisers' feelings: "The prefecture is shuffling us from route to route". Socialist senator Rémi Cardon fears an "organised discouragement" and the gradual loss of a right.

Analysis

The public order argument must first be taken seriously. The State has a duty to protect shopkeepers, residents and the demonstrators themselves, and no one can brush aside the damage of 17 October. Recourse to the courts, on both sides, is moreover the sign of a functioning rule of law: the tribunal reviewed, the minister appealed, the Conseil d'État ruled as the court of last resort. This decision is binding on all.

But a court decision taken in urgency, on a specific case, is not a doctrine. Yet a doctrine does seem to be taking shape: that of social protest relegated to the edges of the capital and major cities, far from symbolic places and from public view. Demonstrating is not only marching; it is making oneself visible. To set, as the prefecture did, the freedom to demonstrate against the freedom of trade is to put a fundamental constitutional right on the same footing as an economic concern which, while legitimate, is of a different nature. When the fight against rioters justifies moving tens of thousands of peaceful demonstrators, it is they who pay for a violent minority.

The climate adds to the concern. The Syndicat de la magistrature and an association defending civil liberties had already petitioned the Conseil d'État on 22 October against presidential statements distinguishing union marches from other gatherings, according to Le Club des juristes. And the idea of a temporary block on social media, notably backed by Gabriel Attal, has circulated in recent days, even though Emmanuel Macron said it was not being considered, according to Europe 1.

Above all, the essential lies elsewhere. These marches speak of the high cost of living, overcrowded classrooms, young people worried about their future. The government itself admitted, through Education Minister Édouard Geffray, that it should have acted faster. Managing the street without responding to what it expresses means facing endless Saturdays.

Conclusion

The Gaullist tradition is that of a State that is strong because it is just, that keeps order without fearing the people. A simple proposal follows: Parliament should set clear and public criteria governing route changes, so that the freedom to demonstrate no longer depends on a night-time tug-of-war between the prefecture and the unions. And the government should open, without waiting for 5 November, genuine negotiations on purchasing power and school resources. The question remains: how many Saturdays will it take for the response to finally be political, and no longer merely a matter of policing?

Article written with the help of artificial intelligence.