Statement: France's Recent Crackdown Subverts Principle of Free Expression

Liberal Action Condemns French Government's Hypocritical Response to Brutal Killing

The French government is exploiting a horrific tragedy to clamp down on the legitimate expressive rights of Muslim citizens and asylum-seekers.

On October 16, 2020, French middle-school teacher Samuel Paty was murdered by beheading, after showing drawings of the Prophet Muhammed to his class in a lesson on free expression. This depraved act against a private individual—apparently in retaliation for a protected speech act—has justifiably shocked the public's conscience. Paty's murder must be condemned, and French authorities should bring the individuals responsible to justice through a fair and impartial criminal investigation.

Instead of confining itself to appropriate measures to bring the perpetrators to justice, however, the French government has launched a far-ranging crackdown on the expressive rights of French Muslims and asylum-seekers. Under the leadership of Emmanuel Macron, French authorities have reportedly raided private homes and subjected children as young as ten to intense questioning about their views and private remarks: statements that should be protected—not policed— under principles of free expression.

Authorities have also threatened individuals with potential criminal charges for alleged speech acts, utilizing the government's broad powers of censorship under laws prohibiting "justifying terrorism," "contempt," and other vaguely-defined expressive acts. Similar laws have reportedly been wielded to shut down NGOs, including organizations that document civil liberties violations against French Muslims, and to justify a mass expulsion of asylum-seekers without due process.

Ironically, French authorities have sought to defend these policies as steps to protect "free expression." In reality, it is the French government's repressive acts that constitute a threat to this vital principle. The ability to hold and articulate views critical of the government and the current state of society is the core of free expression. Clamping down on NGO activity and the comments of private citizens directly undermines this right.

This tragic episode highlights the general lack of free speech protections in France, as well as the danger posed by criminalizing such activities as "justifying terrorism" and alleged "radicalization." Such charges are so broad and vague that they can easily be used as a pretext to stifle dissent. France's recent wave of repression presents a cautionary tale for parties of both the right and the left who advocate for criminal speech codes. Whatever the intentions behind them, France's example shows how easily such codes can be exploited to clamp down on anyone who disagrees with government policy.

The government's use of the phrase "free expression" also elides a crucial distinction between the individual person's obligation not to threaten or kill others and the French state's own responsibility to respect the expressive rights of its citizens. The murder of Samuel Paty was a criminal act committed by private individuals. The mechanism to respond to it is through investigation and prosecution, so that similar atrocities will not be committed in future and all citizens may live free of the fear of violence.

"Free expression," by contrast, refers to the state's obligation not to interfere in the speech and expression of private individuals. It is a duty that belongs to the government alone. And by its recent actions in cracking down on dissent, the French government has woefully fallen short of meeting this obligation.