Posted on 03/06/2007 8:56:22 AM PST by Swordmaker
The French Constitutional Council has approved a law that criminalizes the filming or broadcasting of acts of violence by people other than professional journalists. The law could lead to the imprisonment of eyewitnesses who film acts of police violence, or operators of Web sites publishing the images, one French civil liberties group warned on Tuesday.
The council chose an unfortunate anniversary to publish its decision approving the law, which came exactly 16 years after Los Angeles police officers beating Rodney King were filmed by amateur videographer George Holliday on the night of March 3, 1991. The officers’ acquittal at the end on April 29, 1992 sparked riots in Los Angeles.
If Holliday were to film a similar scene of violence in France today, he could end up in prison as a result of the new law, said Pascal Cohet, a spokesman for French online civil liberties group Odebi. And anyone publishing such images could face up to five years in prison and a fine of €75,000 (US$98,537), potentially a harsher sentence than that for committing the violent act.
Senators and members of the National Assembly had asked the council to rule on the constitutionality of six articles of the Law relating to the prevention of delinquency. The articles dealt with information sharing by social workers, and reduced sentences for minors. The council recommended one minor change, to reconcile conflicting amendments voted in parliament. The law, proposed by Minister of the Interior Nicolas Sarkozy, is intended to clamp down on a wide range of public order offenses. During parliamentary debate of the law, government representatives said the offense of filming or distributing films of acts of violence targets the practice of “happy slapping,” in which a violent attack is filmed by an accomplice, typically with a camera phone, for the amusement of the attacker’s friends.
The broad drafting of the law so as to criminalize the activities of citizen journalists unrelated to the perpetrators of violent acts is no accident, but rather a deliberate decision by the authorities, said Cohet. He is concerned that the law, and others still being debated, will lead to the creation of a parallel judicial system controlling the publication of information on the Internet.
The government has also proposed a certification system for Web sites, blog hosters, mobile-phone operators and Internet service providers, identifying them as government-approved sources of information if they adhere to certain rules. The journalists’ organization Reporters Without Borders, which campaigns for a free press, has warned that such a system could lead to excessive self censorship as organizations worried about losing their certification suppress certain stories.
When you get arrested for violating CFR, let me know.
It's not just the Rats. :(
What do you think happens when a person violates CFR? You think compliance is voluntary?
I think it is unenforceable, and I do not think you need to worry about getting arrested for violating it. No one has to date.
Why do you think it is unenforceable? It has already passed SCOTUS review.
What 5v4, let's wait for a prosecution to decide this thing?
-PJ
Hitler is Alive and well in Europe.
So if a surveillance camera films violence, it must not be legal since the company that owns the camera or the building that is holding it is not a journalist. Cool!
Post that with flashing HTML next time, please. I have never seen so many self deluded fascists who congratulate themselves over being "conservative" as you will find nowadays among conservatives. They have no clue that conservativism (coined a word) STARTS with liberty, NOT with moralism. The conservativism of many freepers is a mishmash of traditional moralism, with a smattering of respect for the law and a willingness to cede just about ANYTHING to the state if it can prove that state power is wielded by "our guys."
That kind of "conservative" is about as potent as a spider web stopping a transfer truck when it comes to protecting liberty. The worst part is that they truly believe they are at the vanguard of resisting socialism and militant state sponsored atheism. I think if I hear one more blue haired geezer defend tyranny on the grounds that "if you don't break the law, you have nothing to worry about" I may just puke in the forum and see if the vomit shows up on anyone's screen but mine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.