GENEVA (7 July 2026) – A UN expert* today urged
France to reject a bill that would presume police officers
and gendarmes who use firearms acted within the law and
acted out of necessity and in proportion with the threat,
unless evidence proves otherwise.
Draft bill 691 is
due to return to the National Assembly for further
consideration on 7 July 2026.
“Every potentially
unlawful death involving law enforcement officials must be
investigated through a prompt, thorough, effective,
independent, impartial and transparent investigation,”
said Morris Tidball-Binz, UN Special Rapporteur on
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.
“The
duty to investigate every potentially unlawful killing rests
with the State,” he said. “It cannot be displaced, in
law or in practice, by requiring victims or their families
to rebut a legal presumption that the use of potentially
lethal force was lawful before the facts have been
independently established.”
The expert warned that
the proposed presumption could affect the initiation, scope
and conduct of investigations by encouraging investigating
authorities to proceed on the assumption that the use of
firearms was lawful before all relevant facts and evidence
have been independently established.
“The obligation
to investigate potentially unlawful deprivations of life is
an essential component of the protection of the right to
life under article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights. Failure to discharge that obligation
may itself constitute a separate violation of the right to
life,” Tidball-Binz said.
Advertisement – scroll to continue reading
He stressed that by
influencing how investigations are initiated and conducted,
the proposed presumption could weaken the active search for
evidence, hinder the establishment of the truth and
responsibility, and increase the risk that arbitrary
deprivations of life remain without
accountability.
“Establishing a legal presumption of
lawfulness before the circumstances of a fatal shooting have
been independently examined risks lowering, in practice, the
threshold of restraint expected from law enforcement
officials in the use of potentially lethal force,” the
Special Rapporteur said. Such a measure could also undermine
public confidence in the ability of the authorities to
investigate deaths involving State agents impartially and
effectively.
He also expressed concern about the
removal of the requirement for officers to wear a uniform or
visible insignia in certain circumstances. Unless
accompanied by effective legal safeguards ensuring the
identification of every officer and the traceability of
every intervention involving the use of force, this
amendment could hinder investigations and compromise the
establishment of responsibility.
Tidball-Binz called
on French authorities to withdraw or fundamentally revise
the amendment and to conduct an independent human rights
impact assessment before its adoption.
“Protecting
law enforcement officials and addressing operational
challenges are legitimate objectives. But they cannot
justify measures that weaken the State’s obligations under
international human rights law to protect the right to life,
thoroughly investigate every potentially unlawful killing,
and ensure accountability where violations occur,” the
expert said.
The Special Rapporteur is in contact with
the Government of France about the compatibility of the
proposed legislation with France’s international human
rights obligations.
*The expert:
Morris Tidball-Binz, Special
Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary
executions
