International Journal on Criminology Volume 4, Number 2, Winter 2016 | Page 92

International Journal on Criminology
until now been reserved for challenging house arrest, and by replacing the examination
of an appeal by an advisory board with the possibility of using summary suspension
and freedom summary procedures, which are more protective of freedoms because
they are not advisory or led by a judge. By subjecting all the administrative measures
taken on the basis of this law to the administrative judge, this provision places the
entire police search procedure under the control of the administrative judge, unless
an offense is discovered, which causes control of the operation to move to the judicial
realm.
The fifth subparagraph specifies the conditions for administrative searches
conducted as part of the law on the state of emergency. It extends the possible search
to all places, such that vehicles or public or private spaces that are not residences fall
under this provision. It does, however, exclude places where protected professions
are conducted. It sets a framework—non-existent today—for this measure of
administrative policing, by limiting its use to circumstances in which there are serious
reasons to believe that the place is frequented by a person whose behavior represents
a threat to public safety and order. The established procedural scheme provides
especially for informing the public prosecutor without delay, as well as the writing
of a report, which is sent to him without delay by the investigating officer, who is the
only one authorized to do so and to proceed with seizures. Finally, it provides access
to computer data accessible from the place searched, as well as copying. In addition,
the search cannot be done except in the presence of the occupant of the premises or
his/her representative or of two witnesses.
Furthermore, it eliminates the possibility of taking measures to control the
press and the media in any way, including radio programs, film projections, and
theatrical performances.
The sixth subparagraph re-evaluates the applicable criminal penalties for the
violation of the law on the state of emergency. Offenses referred to in articles 5
(measures that restrict freedom of movement), 8 (policing of meetings and public
places), and 9 (surrender of weapons) are punishable by 6 months’ imprisonment and
a 7,500 Euro fine. The offense of non-compliance with the geographic limits of house
arrest is punishable by 3 years’ imprisonment and a 45,000 Euro fine. For house
arrest involving such prescriptions, a punishment of one year of imprisonment and a
15,000 Euro fine is applied to offenses of non-compliance in terms of remaining in
the residence at night, the requirement to appear periodically at the police station or
gendarmerie, the remittance of identification documents, the prohibition of entering
into contact with one or several persons, and the placing under mobile electronic
surveillance.
Article 5 supplements article L. 811-3 of the Code of Internal Security by a
reference to the associations and groups dissolved in the application of article 6-1 of
the law of April 3, 1955, created by paragraph 3 of article 4.
Article 6 provides for the application of the law of April 3, 1955, as amended
by article 4, throughout the territory of the French Republic.
91