France: Guilty-by-Association Prosecutions Violate Rights

Using the criminal justice system is the right way to fight terrorism, said Judith Sunderland, Europe and Central Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch. But prosecuting people because of who they know and what they think sacrifices basic rights, and that is wrong in principle and dangerous in practice.

The 84-page report, Preempting Justice: Counterterrorism Laws and Procedures in France, looks at how France uses a vaguely defined terrorism association offense to arrest large numbers of people based on minimal evidence. Human Rights Watch documented credible allegations that terrorism suspects are subjected to oppressive questioning in police custody, linked to a policy that delays a suspects access to a lawyer. Many suspects go on to spend long periods in pre-trial detention. Human Rights Watch talked to two dozen people caught up in terrorism investigations and trials, and conducted interviews with counterterrorism officials and judicial authorities.

The lack of appropriate safeguards within the criminal justice system puts France on the wrong side of human rights law.

France is renowned for its preemptive criminal justice approach to countering terrorism. Specialized prosecutors and investigating judges work closely with police and intelligence services to break up alleged networks before they commit a terrorist attack. But reliance on the broad offense of criminal association in relation to a terrorist undertaking means that large numbers of people are arrested on the basis of minimal evidence and detained for extended periods. Prosecutions are often based on intelligence material, including from countries with poor records on torture, which defendants cannot effectively challenge.

Read More