blog: madic50.blogspot.com / Book:
The Two forms, ed. Amazon
Paris, Wednesday 25 September 2019
CONTRIBUTION (33) TO THE NATIONAL
DEBATE WISHED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC IN 2019.
ANALSYSIS OF THE POLICY OF THE STATE ON
THE RIGHTS OF BOTH SEXES AS DEFINED ON 3 SEPTEMBER BY THE PRIME
MINISTER IN THE GRENELLE OF VIOLENCE MADE TO WOMEN.
(Continuation of the contribution 16 of
August 2019 and previous ones: see madic50.blogspot.com)
A REGRESSION OF THE PLACE OF WOMEN IN
THE STATE
1. Preamble
On September 3, 2019, the Prime
Minister of the French government made a speech for the opening of
the Grenelle fight against violence against women.
It does not exclude marital
maltreatment or any verification of it. However, for language
convenience:
a- It is placed in the report of the
abusive man and the abused woman. This concerns 90% of cases of
family abuse. What is valid for one is valid for the others.
b- He considers that the abuse is
established.
This Grenelle mobilizes from September
3 to November 25, the entire government. The Prime Minister quotes,
the Secretary of State for Equality between women and men, Marlene
Schiappa (which is the initiative), the Minister of Justice, Nicole
Belloubet, the Minister in charge of housing, Julien Denormandie, the
Minister of the Interior, Christophe Castaner, the Minister of
Education, Jean-Michel Blanquer.
It associates by right to the action of
this one a certain number of networks of Directions:
"The government is fully
mobilized, but we need you, your association expertise,
parliamentarian, local elected official or field professional,
whether you are a police officer, policeman, magistrate, social
worker, doctor, teacher, responsible for a shelter, mayor. Because
our responsibility is collective, the work must be collective. "
This is not a request, it is an order:
"It is at this price that this Grenelle can radically change
things by specifying and developing the first emergency measures that
I will announce right now. "
This Grenelle therefore aims to found
new rules for the treatment of conjugal violence (heterosexual or
homosexual). His decisions will be understood as "radical".
2) - The urgency
The Prime Minister places his speech on
the ground of the recognition of an emergency and the obligation for
the government to respond to the different figures of it.
When a woman can no longer bear the
violence of her spouse, there is a breach of equality in the contract
of union.
One spouse uses force to subordinate
the other to his will alone. He wants to make him lose his personal
rights and rob him.
A question arises then to the society:
that of the enjoyment of the occupation of the places. Who will
continue to occupy the premises?
The government responds "radically".
The "first emergency" is to
help women leave the apartment. Consequently, it is therefore to
guarantee men the right to remain there.
Indeed, the two questions do not
receive the same answer.
a- The obligation of women to leave the
premises is the subject of public decisions.
The guarantee given to men to maintain
themselves is silently impressed upon the departure of women.
c- As the President of the Tribunal
said in the Dreyfus case: "The question will not be asked".
With regard to the Prime Minister, we
can not speak of misunderstanding.
3) - The right to escape
The prime minister defines the state's
future policy as follows: "The first priority is to protect
women victims of domestic violence by providing them with rapid
shelter. "
The government, the state, are there to
support the right of the abused to:
a- "leaving the marital home"
b- "Fleeing domestic violence"
By the authority of the government,
what is a state of affairs is bound to become a legislative right
that will constrain administrative law:
a- Massive creation of emergency
accommodation places for single women.
b- Temporary places of six months for
women with children.
c- Geolocation platform for
professionals, including associations and law enforcement agencies,
d- Guarantee Visale, that is to say a
free deposit from Action Logement.
e- By law, the government abolishes
laws that prohibit or criminalize the use of escape.
On 19 September, Marlène Schiappa,
Secretary of State for Equality between Women and Men, confirms this
political line of the "first emergency":
"The state will vouch for women
victims of domestic violence and seeking housing."
4) - The spoliation of rights
This right to escape forces the
administrations, at least in promises. They can no longer send the
woman home, take her children, insult him on all floors.
However, in silence, this recognition
of a right to escape organizes it as the only right of the
ill-treated person.
In addition, the occasion of this
recognition of the right of women not to die by conjugal obligation,
the government establishes that this right to flight places them in a
silent exclusion of the right to stay in the place.
Abused persons have no particular right
to claim to live in these places. They must do "their life"
elsewhere, "redo it". The Prime Minister's directive is as
follows: "The idea is that victims can rebuild their lives. "
It is only in flight that they can
pretend to escape their executioner and "borrow a path of
resilience" as after a natural disaster or civil aggression
outside the couple.
Therefore :
1-The new device for fighting domestic
violence bases the right of the abuser to dispose as he sees fit of
the places where he exercises his violence
2- The abused person has only one
recognized right, that of fleeing.
3- The urgency defined by the
government codifies this legal duality;
a- The abuser retains the enjoyment of
the apartment.
The abused are given the only right to
flee.
It is a right, which means that they
can not be criminally reproached for their flight. They are no longer
at fault to leave the marital home.
The whole frame of the speech is a
double consecration:
1- The occupation of places of law by
the abuser.
2- The absence of enforceable right to
this occupation by the mistreated.
The government thus recognizes the
legal merit of the occupation of the premises by the abuser.
This right of escape and the
renunciation of the right to occupy premises hollow out the right of
the abuser to occupy the premises.
This right is clearly established by
the fact that the abuser can forcibly force the abused to flee but
that it can not use force to stay or return to the scene.
6) - The right of the abuser
If the victim has to leave the
matrimonial home, we now know why.
It is because she has only a right of
use to remain there, and her executioner fixes the rule of these
usages.
He could be convicted for the
similarity of these rules with the various types of public assaults
and under the Medical Certificate.
It is none the less justified to define
and apply the rules of use of the common life.
Admittedly, this will not erase the
medical certificate but will renew the technique of reversing the
burden of proof to the detriment of the mistreated.
What was merely a de facto judicial
practice, a law of jurisprudence, now becomes a legislative right.
It is now officially that she must give
ground for two reasons:
1- By his conduct, including his
revolts and his refusal of the rules set by the legal representative
of them, it is one of the causes of the marital disorder.
2- The abuser is by right occupying the
premises.
Abusers may invoke the Grenelle to
require maintenance in places.
7) - The legal duality of the couple
These situations of law are exclusively
due to the place of the one and the other in the couple of the
mistreatment.
The order to "radically change
things" is to consecrate this legal duality of the protagonists.
In this legal exclusion from the right
of return, there is something that escapes ordinary law.
Indeed, it is the abuser who broke the
contract of cohabitation and not the mistreated.
However, it is officially deprived of
its rights to the occupation of places, even of its property rights.
However, that is not right in law:
a- Can an owner lose the enjoyment of
his property without the justice finding fault?
b- The same goes for the tenant. The
abandonment of occupation is presented as a matter of course while
the spouses are jointly holders of the lease.
c- Once the legality of the flight has
been recognized, it is not self-evident to deny the fugitive the
right to return to the apartment by excluding the spouse.
8) - The strong and the weak
The logic that seems to impose itself
is the dialectic of the strong and the weak. The fort is right, the
weak is wrong.
What was a simple statistical parameter
(women are the majority of the abused) becomes a shift in meaning a
legal principle.
a- Women are weak and men are strong.
b- The battered women are the
revelation, the staging, of the being of the woman.
Women lose the right to occupy the
premises because they are deemed to correspond to the term "weak
sex".
The beaten men join them in this
qualification. They know themselves as "chicks" or
disqualified as "men" ..
Ordinarily, the appearance of the
opposition of strength and weakness (the woman being the "weaker
sex") is not enough to impress the representatives of the state.
If an alcoholic husband keeps the
place, it is not because he subverts the constabulary.
9) - The "fundamental right"
In fact, what is acknowledged to men in
this conflict with this so-called wife, spouse, concubine, is an
unspoken constitutionality of the primacy of men's rights over women.
It is a silent variant of the millennial legal domination of men over
women.
To use the vocabulary of the Court of
Cassation concerning the right to marriage between persons of the
same sex; in the case of battered and fleeing women, men are
recognized as having a "basic right" to stay in the place.
Women must adapt or flee and lose de
facto their registration in the right of occupancy; whether it is the
right to lease or the right of ownership.
10) - Legal cousin
This grabbing of a right to occupy the
premises by trickery or violence is so far a factual jurisprudence, a
practice of the courts.
It is based on the granting by them of
an exclusive right to exercise violence by one party and the
prohibition of this exercise for the other party.
Domestic violence and the spoliations
that accompany them are only a cousin of this logic.
I mention here some sequences at
point-blank.
A- Low-level ethnic cleansing
On April 22, 2018, 300 Jewish
personalities denounced "a low-noise ethnic cleansing" in
so-called "cities" or "suburbs".
a- This "low-level ethnic
cleansing" concerns both Jews and European-type French.
b- The result is the identification of
"cities" or "suburbs" or "neighborhoods"
with Arab and African populations.
In order to achieve these purifying
purposes the purifiers proceeded as well as the marital mistreators
and benefited from the same logic of the right to the flight and the
de facto loss of the right to return to the places that the conjugal
mistresses.
B- The police
The police consider that all clashes do
not belong to the public domain but to the private domain. In a
pinch, the lessor or the trustee can say their word.
a- Either, they are called for
nocturnal fuss.
They then refuse to move on the grounds
that it does not concern the public road.
b- That is, they are called for
intra-real estate violence.
They only move to show the end of the
clashes and invite each other to turn to justice.
c- Either, they are called for a family
strike.
They then come to see that the couple
is reconciled, that he can do it, or that Madame asks to be
accompanied to the police station in the search for a hypothetical
emergency shelter, then in the street, to flee home.
d- Unless there is blood, this type of
violent retains their ability to occupy the premises; including those
they conquered.
C- Justice
Magistrates have established a
jurisprudence on the civil eviction of a tenant or owner, including
the principal residence, either by harassment and intimidation, or by
cunning occupation of the premises, such as during the absence of the
legal inhabitant for vacation reasons.
They always consider that the conqueror
has equal rights to the titular occupant in those places.
They are :
a- Either commercial and free trade in
the case of harassment.
b- Or due to a residence time for
installation by penetration. If the absence of the occupant in title
allows the illegal occupant to keep the time necessary for the
validation of the occupation this one is recognized legal.
3- Balance sheet
This case law is based on a denial of
the right of ownership or rental right in cases of conquest.
Magistrates recognize to third-party
conquerors the right to compel an owner to sell or to give up the use
of his principal residence.
They also allow a tenant to lose the
use of his principal residence by a cunning occupation during his
absence.
This jurisprudence is already the
vector of the creation of large scale spoliation networks.
This logic of legal priority of the
policy of conquest extends far beyond the cases cited. It is the
foundation of the indictment of a growing number of police and
gendarmes.
4- Domestic violence
Domestic violence, under the guise of
married life, combines the harassment and trickery of the occupation.
Harassment, usually outside the
apartment, and cunning occupation, usually permitted by the absence
of the titular occupant, can be introduced into the ordinary
management of the household.
The tenant or the landlord can be both
the object of harassment and cunning occupation.
This court case law allows an abusive
husband to take his abused wife out of the home she owns or
roommates.
The device of the Grenelle will make it
a legislative principle.
A man or, more rarely, a woman can
dispose of the vital security of a woman, of a third, and strip him
of his property, of his occupation rights of the place.
This type of despoiled person can not
take the risk of opposing it, except to be deprived of the benefit of
the Self-Defense.
The pretext is that the victim has
recourse to justice.
But precisely, the action of this
Grenelle legalizes the disqualification of this recourse by making
this escape not the consequence of an aggression but an "emergency"
to accompany and to socialize.
11) - The evacuation of the French
The policy of replacing the right of
escape to the ordinary civil rights of the inhabitants amounts to a
policy of evacuation of the French, or persons placed under French
law, for the benefit of their aggressors.
One of the most well-known precedents
of this policy of evacuation of French then called "nationals"
is the repatriation of the French from Ivory Coast in 2004.
On November 11, 2004, the French
Government requisitioned all French aviation companies, mobilized
5,000 French soldiers based there, for "a first emergency
measure" that was the gradual evacuation of the 14,000 French
living in Côte d'Ivoire. 'Ivory. The latter have in fact lost their
right of rental and ownership over their untransportable property.
It was in Ivory Coast.
By this evacuation, the French
government told the world that France no longer had the means to
protect its nationals abroad in situations of cultural and
demographic submersion.
On September 3, 2019, the French
Government proposes the same administrative logic of evacuation of
French. This time, it's in France.
By this policy of "evacuation"
of battered women and others, such as the Jews of the Cities and
Suburbs, the French government indicates to all the followers of
policies of civil conquests that it no longer has the means to
protect its nationals; in France.
This is linked to the magistrates'
decision to legalize the rape of ten-year-olds on the ground of their
possible consent and by the invalidation of their word as plaintiff.
This rule puts French law in conformity with Sharia law.
12) - Conclusion
Under the guise of an aggregate of
obsolete measures, this policy of the right of flight is a public
capitulation in the defense of gender equality; one more.
The speech of the Prime Minister is the
statement of the terms of this capitulation. She organizes
the fight.
Battered women have something to do
with women since their martyrdom is an effect of the social
inferiority of women.
The Right of escape legally codifies
the renewal.
This Grenelle is a defeat of women and
democracy; one more.
MARC SALOMONE
