According to youremailverifier, France is the homeland of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789, a precursor of subsequent legal instruments to protect human rights, as well as of the motto ‘freedom, equality, brotherhood’.
After the constitutional reform of 2008 which institutionalized gender, social and economic equality, in May 2013 France stood out for another conquest on the civil liberties front: with an amendment to article 143 of the Civil Code, the French parliament recognized and legalized same-sex marriages. The resulting provisions, such as the age of the spouses or some impediments, remain the same as the previous legislation.
As regards the situation of women, in the workplace it appears that, for the same jobs, they still earn on average 25% less than men. ‘Pink quotas’ are foreseen in some electoral consultations, including the European ones, due to a law passed in 1999, but in the 2012 parliamentary elections only 27% of the seats were won by women. In fact, they remain under-represented in public and private management positions.
Economic and social inequality, on the other hand, appears to be decreasing in France, which is one of the few developed countries in which the ratio between the richest and poorest segments of the population has been decreasing over the last thirty years.
The media they are free and represent a wide range of political views. Most of the more than 100 French newspapers are privately owned: some have strong ties to prominent politicians. As has happened elsewhere in Europe, the introduction of anti-terrorism measures has resulted in a partial restriction of some freedoms in recent years. In particular, a law was adopted in 2006 which stipulates that terrorist suspects detained by the police are entitled to a lawyer only after 72 hours; in addition, their right to remain silent during a possible interrogation is not explicitly recognized by the Code of Criminal Procedure. Furthermore, the UN Human Rights Committee has expressed concern about the use of lengthy pre-trial detention – up to four years and eight months – in cases of terrorism and organized crime. The legislation also allows for the surveillance of specific places such as mosques.
Access to the network is free and in 2015, Internet users made up about 85% of the population. However, the anti-terrorism law makes it possible to control the access of suspected terrorists. Since 2009, a law has come into force for the dissemination of intellectual property and the protection of rights on the Internet which provides for the possibility of suspending the connection – for a maximum of one year, without the order of a judge – to users who illegally download music or other copyrighted materials. In July 2015, a law on secret services was enacted, the so-called ‘loi sur le renseignement’, which presents some controversial measures to enhance the state’s anti-terrorism control: in particular, the law provides for the installation of ‘black boxes’ at the main telecommunications operators to collect the connection data of possible suspects in real time. Analyzed through a secret algorithm, this data can be used to identify third parties with whom the suspect comes into contact and it is up to the prime minister rather than the judge to decide to remove the anonymity of this data. The law also facilitates the possibility for the government in cases of ‘absolute urgency’ to give the green light to investigations without the preliminary judgment of an impartial technical commission composed in part of magistrates. these data can be used to identify third parties with whom the suspect comes into contact and it is up to the prime minister rather than the judge to decide to remove the anonymity of this data. The law also facilitates the possibility for the government in cases of ‘absolute urgency’ to give the green light to investigations without the preliminary judgment of an impartial technical commission composed in part of magistrates. these data can be used to identify third parties with whom the suspect comes into contact and it is up to the prime minister rather than the judge to decide to remove the anonymity of this data. The law also facilitates the possibility for the government in cases of ‘absolute urgency’ to give the green light to investigations without the preliminary judgment of an impartial technical commission composed in part of magistrates.
