The Constitutional Council validates the essential elements of the drug trafficking law, including the solitary confinement regime

The Constitutional Council on Thursday censored a handful of articles of the law against drug trafficking , but validated, with one reservation, the prison regime of isolation planned for the most dangerous drug traffickers.

In total, he declared 32 articles of this text "aimed at freeing France from the trap of drug trafficking" to be constitutional, pronounced the partial or total censure of six other articles and formulated several reservations.

The Council had been approached by left-wing MPs, who believed that many articles of this law, introduced by the Ministers of the Interior and Justice, Bruno Retailleau and Gérald Darmanin, posed "serious threats" to the rule of law. They asked it in particular to censor the article concerning the now-iconic creation of high-security prison units for the most dangerous traffickers.

The first to open, at the end of July, will be the one at Vendin-le-Vieil prison (Pas-de-Calais). The law provides that prisoners, whether on remand or sentenced, are assigned there by decision of the Minister of Justice, under certain conditions.

The accompanying prison regime, inspired by Italian anti-mafia laws, allows, among other things, for supervised full-body searches in the event of contact without the supervision of an officer. These provisions have been denounced, notably by the International Prison Observatory (IPO), which considers them "violative of fundamental rights." The Sages declared this article constitutional, while expressing a reservation on the issue of full-body searches.

These should only be carried out when supervision by a prison officer "has been prevented by particular circumstances relating to the privacy of the detained person, the need to preserve the confidentiality of their exchanges or exceptional difficulties in organizing the prison service," the Council stressed.

"A major step forward for the security of the French people! The Constitutional Council largely validates the provisions relating to justice in the drug trafficking law. A national anti-organized crime prosecution service, a very strict prison regime for drug traffickers, anonymous procedures for prison officers... concrete measures for the security of the French people and against those who flout the Republic," Gérald Darmanin said on X.

The six censored articles also include direct access by intelligence services to tax databases and the experimentation with the use of algorithmic intelligence against drug trafficking, which, according to the Sages, does not ensure "a balanced conciliation" between the prevention of breaches of public order and the right to respect for private life.

On the separate report, also called a safe file, which allows certain information on investigation techniques not to be disclosed to traffickers and their lawyers, the Council censored one of the provisions which allowed "that exceptionally and by specially motivated decision, a criminal conviction may, in certain cases, be pronounced" without the person in question having been able to contest the collection of evidence presented against him.

He also partially censored the article concerning the generalisation of videoconferencing for people detained in these areas for the fight against organised crime.

This provision was introduced to avoid as much as possible the transportation of dangerous prisoners and therefore the risk of escape, such as that of the multi-recidivist drug trafficker Mohamed Amra who cost the lives of two prison officers on May 14, 2024 at the Incarville toll booth (Eure).

The Constitutional Council considered that it constituted an "excessive infringement of the rights of the defence" for persons placed in pre-trial detention.

On the remote activation of an electronic device for wiretapping, he ruled that the provisions of the article pursued "the constitutional objectives of searching for perpetrators of offences and preventing breaches of public order" and were "surrounded by sufficient guarantees to avoid disproportionate interference with the right to respect for private life".

But the Sages added a reservation, considering that these provisions were only applicable to offenses "committed by an organized gang and punishable by a prison sentence of five years or more."