Question 8280 — discrimination

Summary

Mr. Raphaël Arnault draws the attention of the Minister of State, Minister of the Interior, to the fact that “the identity check takes place without harming the dignity of the person who is subject to it” according to the internal security code. However, a survey on access to rights by the Defender of Rights published on June 24, 2025, on police/population relations, reveals that certain populations experience more police checks than others. Indeed, the Defender of Rights notes that “despite these very significant increases in checks, categories of the population report less frequent checks than certain social groups: male, young and populations perceived as black, Arab or North African remain over-represented among those frequently checked”. The investigation shows that these young men have four times more likely to have been stopped at least once by the police than the rest of the population. This risk is increased to 12 times more for in-depth checks (search, pat-down, driving to the station, order to leave the premises). This type of control is also rarely justified by the police given that “among people who have experienced an extensive control, only 42% say they have benefited from justification; this proportion is 51% among people who have experienced a simple identity check.” These facts are not new. In 2009, surveys carried out by the CNRS and Open Society Justice around several Parisian stations established that individuals perceived as “black” were already subject to six times more police checks than individuals perceived as “white”. For individuals perceived as “Arab”, this frequency is multiplied by eight compared to individuals perceived as “white”. These identity checks are discriminatory and abusive towards populations perceived as non-white. They undermine the dignity of people when these controls are targeted more towards black, Arab or North African people. In a judgment delivered on November 9, 2016, the Court of Cassation qualified the discriminatory controls as gross negligence attributable to the State. This decision established the principle according to which the probationary regime applicable to non-discrimination also extends to the activities of law enforcement. However, in the absence of a report, receipt or any other equivalent support, it becomes impossible to establish proof of a possible breach. The Defender of Rights had, however, as early as 2016, highlighted the existence of an obligation positive responsibility for the authorities to implement procedures and practices to prevent any form of discrimination. While the European Court of Human Rights has just condemned, this Thursday, June 26, France for a discriminatory identity check, he asks what measures the Government intends to take to compensate for this discriminatory nature of identity checks and if it intends to establish a identity check receipt which requires the police to provide reasons for their check and constitutes an essential statistical tool for public and ministerial action.

Machine translation from French. The official text remains authoritative.

Timeline

No timeline events have been ingested for this record yet.

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

No documents linked.

Sponsors

No sponsors or actors listed by the source.

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.