The event had all the trappings of a typical festival: a four-day festival pass (for a donation of any amount), souvenir t-shirts, beer in reusable plastic cups. But the celebrities featured were not the usual festival headliners. The crowd went wild for Cédric Herrou, a local farmer who has hosted hundreds of migrants and been brought to court for his actions; José Bové, a deputy in the European Parliament known for his anti-globalisation activism; Mireille Damiano, a lawyer who defends migrant minors in irregular legal situations. As Damiano said, “we’ve been treated as smugglers so often that for once claiming the status of smuggler is good!” They led lively debates along with festival attendees, who had come from the villages of the valley, across France, and some from across Europe. Still, notably absent from the festival were migrants and refugees themselves, with only a few in attendance. To show true solidarity with migrants, those assisting migrants must also make space for their voices. [...]
Residents of the valley are assisting those who arrive with food, shelter, and help with legal processes. However, both EU and French law criminalize actions that facilitate the illegal entry, stay or circulation of foreigners. Violations of this law are known as a “délit de solidarité”, an offense of solidarity, and residents of the valley have faced legal consequences for their humanitarian actions to assist migrants. Despite this hostile climate, residents of the valley continue welcoming migrants in their capacity as individuals and through associations like Roya Citoyenne. Those helping migrants claim that doing so is their duty as French citizens, an act of fraternité to protect the human rights of vulnerable people. [...]
A major victory these activists was the recent decision of the French Constitutional Court affirming “fraternité” as a constitutional principle. The ruling stated that “the concept of Fraternité confers the freedom to help others, for humanitarian purposes, without consideration for the legality of their stay on national territory”. While this is undoubtedly good news, there are some important concerns. First, there is the issue of compensation: the humanitarian action cannot have any direct or indirect benefit for the person performing it. However, compensation is not explicitly defined as financial gain, which leaves a grey area. One court in France has even ruled that if the humanitarian action contributes to a person’s activism that can be considered compensation. The court decision also leaves it up to the legislature how to balance the principle of fraternité with public order, which could still result in measures restricting assistance as part of the political agenda securitizing migration.
No comments:
Post a Comment