The French Senate passed a controversial draft law on October 27, 2026, aimed at curbing public disorder, but the legislation now faces intense scrutiny for its potential to erode fundamental rights to peaceful assembly and free expression.
The bill, often referred to as the “vandals pay” legislation, is currently awaiting review by the National Assembly.
Human Rights Watch has called on French lawmakers to reject the bill entirely, characterizing it as a threat to democratic norms. “Penalizing people engaged in their right to peaceful protest is the wrong answer to tackling violent disorder in France,” said Eva Cossé, a senior Europe researcher at the organization.
The government introduced the draft law on September 16 under a fast-track procedure. It was subsequently toughened by conservative senators following a wave of nationwide high school protests regarding education funding and cost-of-living concerns. These demonstrations, particularly those on October 17, saw widespread property damage, looting, and violent clashes with law enforcement.
The proposed legislation builds upon security measures adopted in August, which were originally intended to address illegal dance parties, football-related rioting, and street racing. However, critics argue the new provisions go far beyond these aims by targeting the right to peaceful protest itself.
Courts Impose Civil Liability and Fines for Protest Damage
Under the current text, courts would have the authority to impose joint civil liability for property damage occurring during a protest. This allows judges to order individual participants—or the parents of children who participated—to pay up to €10,000 in damages, even if those individuals did not personally commit acts of violence.
The bill also introduces severe consequences for participating in what is defined as an “unlawful assembly.” Under the French criminal code, this includes any gathering on a public highway or in a public place deemed likely to disturb order.
Participants who fail to disperse after police issue orders face potential fines or prison time. Legal commentators have said that the requirement for dispersal orders is not an ineffective safeguard, because such orders are in practice either not issued or are not sufficiently audible.
Surveillance and Social Housing Restrictions
The draft law grants prefects the power, without prior judicial oversight, to preemptively ban individuals from protests for 24 hours on the basis of police intelligence or evidence of repeated or serious violent behavior during the three preceding years.
To recover court-ordered damages, after a conviction, the state would be permitted to confiscate various social security payments from parents, including child benefit, back-to-school allowance, and other allocations, to pay for damages caused by their children under age 18.
The legislation also allows authorities to deny social housing to adults convicted of “unlawful assembly” or serious public order offenses near residential buildings in the preceding three years, and provides grounds to seek to evict families from social housing if a member of the household repeatedly engages in such acts.
State Expands Surveillance Using Video and Drones
The bill expands the state’s ability to monitor public gatherings through the use of video surveillance and algorithmic processing, technology first introduced for the Paris 2024 Olympics. Senators also added a provision authorizing the use of drones and other police aircraft to record and transmit footage to track, identify, and prosecute individuals for protest-related offenses.
The law mandates that tech companies, without a court order, take down online content that authorities deem capable of provoking offenses within 24 hours. Failure to comply could result in the blocking of the site and massive fines.
International Human Rights Obligations
Human Rights Watch warns that the legislation is incompatible with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The European Court of Human Rights has previously found France violated a standard ruling that peaceful participants in a protest may not be held responsible for reprehensible acts committed by others, noting that even a lower end disciplinary sanction imposed on a protester who did not commit any culpable act was not permitted.
Related reading
