Should France presume police and gendarmes acted lawfully when using firearms?
France’s National Assembly approved a rebuttable presumption that police and gendarmes who fire their weapons acted within the law. The government calls it procedural protection; rights bodies warn about investigations and accountability.
Claim in dispute
The bill creates a simple, rebuttable presumption and does not prevent judicial investigations or prosecutors from treating an officer as a suspect when the statutory firearm-use conditions appear not to have been met.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
The fixed reference point is the proposed statutory presumption in the version of the bill adopted by the National Assembly and transmitted to the Senate—not the September protest itself and not a finding about any particular police shooting.
Under Article L. 435-1 of the Internal Security Code (opens in a new tab), national police officers and gendarmes may use firearms only in specified circumstances, in cases of absolute necessity and in a strictly proportionate manner. Éric Pauget’s original Bill 691 (opens in a new tab), filed on December 3, 2024, proposed a Penal Code presumption of self-defense for national and municipal police and gendarmes when they used weapons under the statutory rules.
A government amendment adopted on January 22, 2026 (opens in a new tab) replaced that proposal with a presumption under the Internal Security Code. In the Assembly-approved text now before the Senate (opens in a new tab), national police and gendarmes who use firearms would be presumed to have acted within one of Article L. 435-1’s authorized cases and in compliance with absolute necessity and strict proportionality. The text says any contrary evidence may rebut the presumption at any time. It does not cover municipal police. The bill also separately rewrites the rule permitting firearm use to prevent the imminent repetition of a murder or attempted murder and removes the existing uniform-or-visible-insignia condition for that circumstance.
During the July 7 Assembly debate (opens in a new tab), Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez described the presumption as rebuttable, said firearm use would continue to lead to a judicial investigation and said prosecutors could still detain an officer for questioning if the statutory conditions appeared not to be met. Alliance Police Nationale has advocated a broader presumption covering police conduct beyond firearm use. The National Assembly adopted the bill 313–199, with five abstentions (opens in a new tab), and transmitted it to the Senate for first reading.
The Defender of Rights (opens in a new tab) warned that the presumption could alter how investigations and judicial oversight operate in practice, weaken effective remedies and suggest to officers that firearm authority had expanded even though necessity and proportionality would remain. UN Special Rapporteur Morris Tidball-Binz (opens in a new tab) argued that the state’s duty to investigate potentially unlawful deaths should not be displaced by requiring victims or their families to rebut a presumption before the facts are independently established. Amnesty International France (opens in a new tab) calls the measure a threat to accountability and access to justice.
An Assembly petition opposing the proposal (opens in a new tab) closed with 732,086 signatures; the Law Committee later classified and closed it. Demonstrations were held in Paris and other French cities on September 20. Those developments demonstrate public opposition, but they do not by themselves establish how courts or investigators would apply the presumption. As of September 22, 2026, the proposal remains pending in the Senate and is not enacted law.
Timeline
6 timeline entries on this page. Dates: December 3, 2024 to September 20, 2026
December 2024
1 event
Éric Pauget files Bill 691
Source release
Pauget and co-sponsors filed a bill proposing a Penal Code presumption of self-defense for national police, municipal police and gendarmes using weapons under statutory conditions.
[01]National Assembly Bill 691: Presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officers
Original bill filed by Éric Pauget and co-sponsors. It proposed a Penal Code presumption of self-defense for national police, municipal police and gendarmes, subject to rebuttal if an investigation established manifest disproportionality or lack of absolute necessity.
National Assembly Bill 691: Presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officersArticle unique and statement of reasons
415 days between recorded events
January 2026
1 event
Assembly adopts Government Amendment 39
The National Assembly adopted the government’s rewrite, replacing the proposed self-defense presumption with a presumption that firearm use by national police and gendarmes complied with the authorized cases, absolute necessity and strict proportionality in the Internal Security Code.
[02]Government Amendment 39 to National Assembly Bill 691
Source excerpt
Cette présomption peut, à tout moment, être renversée par tout élément de preuve contraire.
Government amendment that replaced the original Penal Code self-defense presumption with a presumption under the Internal Security Code that firearm use by national police and gendarmes was lawful under Article L. 435-1. It also rewrote the provision governing intervention to prevent a repeat murder or attempted murder.
Government Amendment 39 to National Assembly Bill 691Amendment text and explanatory statement; adopted January 22, 2026
155 days between recorded events
June 2026
1 event
Opposition petition opens on the National Assembly platform
Reaction
Issam El Khalfaoui launched a petition opposing the proposed presumption. It later closed with 732,086 signatures.
[03]Petition against a presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officers
National Assembly petition initiated by Issam El Khalfaoui opposing the proposal. The petition closed with 732,086 signatures, exceeding the Assembly platform's 500,000-signature threshold for possible committee consideration.
Petition against a presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officersPetition i-6334; signature total displayed before closure
July 2026
2 events
National Assembly passes the bill
The National Assembly approved Bill 691 by 313 votes to 199, with five abstentions, and transmitted the adopted text to the Senate.
[04]National Assembly public ballot 7987 on Bill 691
Source excerpt
Pour l'adoption : 313. Contre : 199. Abstention : 5.
Official roll-call result for the National Assembly's final vote on Bill 691. The Assembly adopted the bill by 313 votes to 199, with five abstentions.
National Assembly public ballot 7987 on Bill 691Overall result and member-by-member vote[05]Senate Bill 866: Presumption of legitimate use of firearms by law-enforcement officers
Source excerpt
Cette présomption peut, à tout moment, être renversée par tout élément de preuve contraire.
Official text adopted by the National Assembly and transmitted to the Senate. It would presume that national police officers and gendarmes who fire their weapons acted within an authorized statutory case and complied with absolute necessity and strict proportionality; the presumption may be rebutted at any time by contrary evidence.
Senate Bill 866: Presumption of legitimate use of firearms by law-enforcement officersArticle unique, II, proposed Article L. 435-1 IIILaw Committee closes the opposition petition
The National Assembly Law Committee considered petition i-6334 and classified it, closing the petition process despite the signature total exceeding 500,000.
[06]National Assembly Law Committee decision to close petition i-6334
Official notice that the National Assembly Law Committee classified and closed the petition opposing the bill after considering it on July 21, 2026.
National Assembly Law Committee decision to close petition i-6334Committee decision and explanation[03]Petition against a presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officers
National Assembly petition initiated by Issam El Khalfaoui opposing the proposal. The petition closed with 732,086 signatures, exceeding the Assembly platform's 500,000-signature threshold for possible committee consideration.
Petition against a presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officersPetition i-6334; signature total displayed before closure
61 days between recorded events
September 2026
1 event
Protests oppose the pending bill in French cities
Reaction
Demonstrators marched in Paris and other French cities against the proposed presumption. Reporting cited police estimates of 4,500 participants in Lyon and 3,700 in Toulouse.
[07]Thousands march in France against bill granting police presumption of legitimate self-defense
Report on demonstrations held in Paris and other French cities on September 20, 2026, against the pending bill. It reports organizer participation, police estimates of 4,500 people in Lyon and 3,700 in Toulouse, and comments from participants and political figures.
Thousands march in France against bill granting police presumption of legitimate self-defenseFull report; turnout paragraphs and remarks by Mathilde Panot
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
The bill creates a simple, rebuttable presumption and does not prevent judicial investigations or prosecutors from treating an officer as a suspect when the statutory firearm-use conditions appear not to have been met.
Sources (1)
- National Assembly debate on Bill 691, July 7, 2026Laurent Nuñez interventions at transcript lines corresponding to paragraphs 1138–1165 and 1495–1515
Disputed claim
The proposed presumption could change how investigations and judicial oversight operate in practice, shift evidentiary burdens against victims and weaken effective remedies.
Défenseur des droits
Sources (1)
- Defender of Rights opinion on the proposed presumption for law-enforcement officers · Défenseur des droitsSections “Un risque d'affaiblissement du contrôle judiciaire” and “Un signal dangereux”
Disputed claim
A presumption favoring lawful firearm use could weaken the active search for evidence and increase the risk that potentially arbitrary deprivations of life go without accountability.
Sources (1)
- France: Proposed presumption of lawful police shootings could fuel impunity, warns UN expertStatements attributed to Morris Tidball-Binz
Disputed claim
Police officers should benefit from a broader presumption of legitimacy, including when making arrests without firing a weapon, with the individual bearing the burden of producing contrary proof.
Alliance Police Nationale
Sources (1)
- Alliance Police Nationale statement on a presumption of self-defense · Alliance Police NationaleComplete statement, paragraphs beginning “Pendant que certains” and “Un policier”
Show fewer disputed claims
Disputed claim
The proposed presumption would weaken the state’s accountability for potentially lethal force and impede victims’ access to justice.
Amnesty International France
Sources (1)
- Amnesty France statement opposing the proposed firearm-use presumption · Amnesty International FranceOpening summary and section on accountability for lethal force
Response record
Responses
Latest recorded positions: 12. Dates: January 21, 2026 to July 7, 2026
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
5 responses on this page
Nicolas Tryzna "Elle propose une présomption simple, renversable, loin des mensonges répétés depuis des jours. Il est de notre responsabilité de leur garantir un cadre juridique à la fois clair et protecteur."
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Nicolas Tryzna question on the presumption of legitimate firearm use, July 7, 2026Nicolas Tryzna intervention, transcript paragraphs 1103–1119Defended or excusedCase context: Should France presume police and gendarmes acted lawfully when using firearms?
Why this label?
He explicitly welcomed and defended the proposal as rebuttable legal protection for law-enforcement officers. That is direct support for the fixed reference point.
This label describes the statement’s response within the context above.
Read context and background
Tryzna welcomed the bill’s return, characterized its presumption as rebuttable and said lawmakers should provide police and gendarmes a clear, protective legal framework.
Role at the time: Member of the National Assembly, Droite Républicaine group
Before the statement
During questions to the government, Tryzna cited assaults and other pressures on law-enforcement officers before welcoming the government’s decision to return the proposal to the agenda.
After the statement
He framed the proposal as a statement of public trust in police and gendarmes and asked what further measures the government would take to support them.
Nicolas Tryzna question on the presumption of legitimate firearm use, July 7, 2026Nicolas Tryzna intervention, transcript paragraphs 1103–1119Laurent NuñezDirectly involved "Cette proposition de loi ne prévoit qu’une présomption simple – c’est écrit noir sur blanc –, qui peut être levée à tout moment. J’ai entendu dire tout à l’heure qu’il faudrait attendre le jugement. Ce n’est pas le cas : n’importe quel procureur pourra placer en garde à vue un policier ou un gendarme s’il considère que l’usage de l’arme n’a pas été fait dans le cadre prévu par l’article 435-1 du code de la sécurité intérieure."
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)National Assembly debate on Bill 691, July 7, 2026Laurent Nuñez interventions at transcript lines corresponding to paragraphs 1138–1165 and 1495–1515Defended or excusedResponding to: The bill creates a simple, rebuttable presumption and does not prevent judicial investigations or prosecutors from treating an officer as a suspect when the statutory firearm-use conditions appear not to have been met.
Why this label?
Relative to the case-level reference point—the proposed statutory presumption favoring lawful firearm use—Nuñez expressly supports the bill and argues that the measure is limited and compatible with prosecutorial oversight. That is a defense of the policy, not merely a challenge to an opponent’s terminology.
This label describes the statement’s response within the context above.
Read context and background
Nuñez supported the bill and argued that its rebuttable presumption would not prevent prosecutors from investigating or detaining an officer when the firearm-use conditions appeared not to be met.
Role at the time: French minister of the interior
Before the statement
Assembly member Sabrina Sebaihi argued that the bill would invert the burden of proof, strengthen impunity and endanger young people. Nuñez responded during questions to the government before the chamber resumed detailed consideration of the bill.
After the statement
Nuñez continued that police and gendarmes are heavily monitored, must justify force and generally receive a review of whether an intervention was proportionate. He later rejected critics’ use of cases in which officers had been cleared.
National Assembly debate on Bill 691, July 7, 2026Laurent Nuñez interventions at transcript lines corresponding to paragraphs 1138–1165 and 1495–1515Alliance Police Nationale "Pendant que certains jouent sur la sémantique, Alliance Police Nationale persiste et signe : un seul sujet est recevable la présomption de légitime défense pour tous les policiers. Un policier, qu’il fasse usage de son arme ou non, qui interpelle un individu agit légitimement. À l’individu d’apporter la preuve contraire, pas à nos collègues de se justifier en permanence."
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)Alliance Police Nationale statement on a presumption of self-defense · Alliance Police NationaleComplete statement, paragraphs beginning “Pendant que certains” and “Un policier”Defended or excusedResponding to: Police officers should benefit from a broader presumption of legitimacy, including when making arrests without firing a weapon, with the individual bearing the burden of producing contrary proof.
Why this label?
Relative to the proposed statutory presumption favoring lawful firearm use, Alliance explicitly supports the policy direction and asks that it extend further. Its advocacy is a substantive defense of the presumption, even though the organization preferred a broader version than the government amendment.
This label describes the statement’s response within the context above.
Read context and background
Alliance Police Nationale supported a presumption for officers and argued for a broader rule applying to arrests even when an officer did not fire a weapon.
Role at the time: French police trade union
Before the statement
The National Assembly had adopted Government Amendment 39 the previous day, replacing the original self-defense provision with a presumption tied to lawful firearm use under the Internal Security Code.
After the statement
The statement urged political and union critics to stop incriminating officers and framed respect and protection for police as necessary to public security.
Alliance Police Nationale statement on a presumption of self-defense · Alliance Police NationaleComplete statement, paragraphs beginning “Pendant que certains” and “Un policier”Ian Boucard "Il s’agit d’une présomption simple. Cela signifie deux choses essentielles. Premièrement, elle n’est pas un blanc-seing : elle ne joue que lorsque l’usage de l’arme s’inscrit dans un cadre légal déjà strict, fondé sur l’absolue nécessité et la stricte proportionnalité de l’usage de la force, et dans des hypothèses précisément énumérées."
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Ian Boucard presentation of Bill 691, January 22, 2026Presentation of Bill 691, Ian Boucard interventionDefended or excusedCase context: Should France presume police and gendarmes acted lawfully when using firearms?
Why this label?
As rapporteur, he directly endorsed the proposal and argued that its safeguards prevent it from becoming a blank check. That is direct support for the fixed reference point.
This label describes the statement’s response within the context above.
Read context and background
Boucard defended the proposal as a rebuttable presumption operating only within existing, enumerated firearm-use rules requiring absolute necessity and strict proportionality.
Role at the time: Rapporteur for Bill 691 and member of the National Assembly
Before the statement
Boucard was presenting the bill to the National Assembly and explaining how its proposed evidentiary presumption would operate.
After the statement
He added that contrary evidence could rebut the presumption and that judicial assessment of necessity and proportionality would remain available.
Ian Boucard presentation of Bill 691, January 22, 2026Presentation of Bill 691, Ian Boucard interventionÉric PaugetDirectly involved "Il s’agit, par la loi, de créer un bouclier juridique sécurisant le cadre d’usage des armes de ceux faisant face à une menace. Mais la présomption n’est pas l’impunité."
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Éric Pauget remarks on Bill 691, January 22, 2026Discussion générale, Éric Pauget interventionDefended or excusedCase context: Should France presume police and gendarmes acted lawfully when using firearms?
Why this label?
He authored the proposal and expressly argued for the presumption as a protective legal measure. That is direct support for the fixed reference point.
This label describes the statement’s response within the context above.
Read context and background
Pauget defended the proposed presumption as a legal shield for officers who use firearms in threatening situations, while rejecting the characterization that it would grant impunity.
Role at the time: Sponsor of Bill 691 and member of the National Assembly
Before the statement
During the National Assembly’s general debate on his proposal, Pauget described violence and legal uncertainty faced by police and gendarmes.
After the statement
He continued by distinguishing the proposed presumption from impunity and arguing that officers still operate within statutory limits.
Éric Pauget remarks on Bill 691, January 22, 2026Discussion générale, Éric Pauget intervention
Sources
(19)
Original text
Senate Bill 866: Presumption of legitimate use of firearms by law-enforcement officers
Relevant passage: Article unique, II, proposed Article L. 435-1 III
Excerpt
"Cette présomption peut, à tout moment, être renversée par tout élément de preuve contraire."
About this source
Official text adopted by the National Assembly and transmitted to the Senate. It would presume that national police officers and gendarmes who fire their weapons acted within an authorized statutory case and complied with absolute necessity and strict proportionality; the presumption may be rebutted at any time by contrary evidence.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Syndicat de la magistrature statement on presumption of legitimate firearm use
Relevant passage: Complete statement, paragraphs 3–15
Excerpt
"S’il est adopté, ce texte porterait une grave atteinte au droit à la vie [...] Par cette loi, la France violerait cette obligation."
About this source
Official statement by the magistrates’ union. It argued that the proposed presumption would violate rights protections, weaken evidence collection and judicial control, and foster impunity.
- Author
- Syndicat de la magistrature
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Manuel Bompard question on Bill 691, July 7, 2026
Relevant passage: Question au Gouvernement no. 1753
Excerpt
"Ce ne sera plus à l’auteur du tir d’apporter la preuve [...] mais à la victime de prouver que ce tir n’était pas conforme."
About this source
Official National Assembly publication of Bompard’s July 7 question. He argued that the proposal would shift the evidentiary burden to victims, impede immediate evidence gathering and create impunity.
- Author
- Manuel Bompard
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Sabrina Sebaihi question on Bill 691, July 7, 2026
Relevant passage: Question au Gouvernement no. 1764
Excerpt
"Elle crée une présomption de légitime défense qui inverse la charge de la preuve, fondement de notre système judiciaire."
About this source
Official National Assembly publication of Sebaihi’s July 7 question. She opposed the proposal, saying it reverses the burden of proof and would reinforce impunity rather than protect officers or the public.
- Author
- Sabrina Sebaihi
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
CNCDH letter on the proposed presumption for police firearm use
Relevant passage: CNCDH summary and linked presidential letter
Excerpt
"Le président de la CNCDH [...] appelle au rejet de cette proposition de loi."
About this source
Official CNCDH publication summarizing its president’s letter to lawmakers. The institution called for rejection and warned that the reform would weaken oversight and increase the burden on victims’ families.
- Author
- Commission nationale consultative des droits de l’homme
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Nicolas Tryzna question on the presumption of legitimate firearm use, July 7, 2026
Relevant passage: Nicolas Tryzna intervention, transcript paragraphs 1103–1119
Excerpt
"Elle propose une présomption simple, renversable [...] Il est de notre responsabilité de leur garantir un cadre juridique à la fois clair et protecteur."
About this source
Official verbatim National Assembly record. Tryzna welcomed the government’s return of the proposal, described it as rebuttable and framed it as legal protection for police and gendarmes.
- Author
- Nicolas Tryzna
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Ian Boucard presentation of Bill 691, January 22, 2026
Relevant passage: Presentation of Bill 691, Ian Boucard intervention
Excerpt
"Elle n’est pas un blanc-seing : elle ne joue que lorsque l’usage de l’arme s’inscrit dans un cadre légal déjà strict."
About this source
Official verbatim National Assembly record. As rapporteur, Boucard presented the proposal as a simple, rebuttable presumption limited to firearm uses already governed by necessity and proportionality requirements.
- Author
- Ian Boucard
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Éric Pauget remarks on Bill 691, January 22, 2026
Relevant passage: Discussion générale, Éric Pauget intervention
Excerpt
"Il s’agit, par la loi, de créer un bouclier juridique sécurisant le cadre d’usage des armes [...] Mais la présomption n’est pas l’impunité."
About this source
Official verbatim National Assembly record. The bill’s sponsor argued that a presumption would protect officers facing danger and legal uncertainty, while stating that it would not amount to impunity.
- Author
- Éric Pauget
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
National Assembly Law Committee decision to close petition i-6334
Relevant passage: Committee decision and explanation
About this source
Official notice that the National Assembly Law Committee classified and closed the petition opposing the bill after considering it on July 21, 2026.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Thousands march in France against bill granting police presumption of legitimate self-defense
Relevant passage: Full report; turnout paragraphs and remarks by Mathilde Panot
About this source
Report on demonstrations held in Paris and other French cities on September 20, 2026, against the pending bill. It reports organizer participation, police estimates of 4,500 people in Lyon and 3,700 in Toulouse, and comments from participants and political figures.
- Author
- Le Monde with AFP
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Amnesty France statement opposing the proposed firearm-use presumption
Relevant passage: Opening summary and section on accountability for lethal force
Excerpt
"Amnesty International appelle à rejeter ce texte qui affaiblirait l’obligation de l’État de rendre des comptes."
About this source
Official Amnesty International France statement published before the Assembly vote. It calls for rejection of the proposal and argues that the presumption would weaken state accountability for potentially lethal force and victims' access to justice.
- Author
- Amnesty International France
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Petition against a presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officers
Relevant passage: Petition i-6334; signature total displayed before closure
About this source
National Assembly petition initiated by Issam El Khalfaoui opposing the proposal. The petition closed with 732,086 signatures, exceeding the Assembly platform's 500,000-signature threshold for possible committee consideration.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Alliance Police Nationale statement on a presumption of self-defense
Relevant passage: Complete statement, paragraphs beginning “Pendant que certains” and “Un policier”
Excerpt
"À l’individu d’apporter la preuve contraire, pas à nos collègues de se justifier en permanence."
About this source
Official union statement issued the day after the government amendment was adopted. Alliance argued for a broader presumption covering police conduct beyond firearm use and said the individual, rather than the officer, should provide contrary proof.
- Author
- Alliance Police Nationale
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Defender of Rights opinion on the proposed presumption for law-enforcement officers
Relevant passage: Sections “Un risque d'affaiblissement du contrôle judiciaire” and “Un signal dangereux”
Excerpt
"Une telle présomption est de nature à porter atteinte aux garanties attachées au droit fondamental à la vie."
About this source
Official summary of Opinion 26-05, issued by then-Defender of Rights Claire Hédon. It warns that the proposal could affect judicial oversight, investigation practice, victims' access to remedies and public confidence, while creating confusion without changing the necessity and proportionality requirements.
- Author
- Défenseur des droits
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
France: Proposed presumption of lawful police shootings could fuel impunity, warns UN expert
Relevant passage: Statements attributed to Morris Tidball-Binz
Excerpt
"The duty to investigate every potentially unlawful killing rests with the State."
About this source
UN press release quoting Special Rapporteur Morris Tidball-Binz. He said potentially unlawful deaths involving law enforcement require prompt, effective, independent and transparent investigation, and warned that victims or families should not have to rebut a legal presumption before facts are independently established.
- Author
- Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
National Assembly public ballot 7987 on Bill 691
Relevant passage: Overall result and member-by-member vote
Excerpt
"Pour l'adoption : 313. Contre : 199. Abstention : 5."
About this source
Official roll-call result for the National Assembly's final vote on Bill 691. The Assembly adopted the bill by 313 votes to 199, with five abstentions.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Government Amendment 39 to National Assembly Bill 691
Relevant passage: Amendment text and explanatory statement; adopted January 22, 2026
Excerpt
"Cette présomption peut, à tout moment, être renversée par tout élément de preuve contraire."
About this source
Government amendment that replaced the original Penal Code self-defense presumption with a presumption under the Internal Security Code that firearm use by national police and gendarmes was lawful under Article L. 435-1. It also rewrote the provision governing intervention to prevent a repeat murder or attempted murder.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
National Assembly debate on Bill 691, July 7, 2026
Relevant passage: Laurent Nuñez interventions at transcript lines corresponding to paragraphs 1138–1165 and 1495–1515
Excerpt
"Cette proposition de loi ne prévoit qu’une présomption simple [...] qui peut être levée à tout moment."
About this source
Official verbatim debate record. Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez supported the bill, described the presumption as rebuttable, said firearm incidents would continue to trigger judicial investigations and said prosecutors could still place an officer in custody when the statutory conditions appeared not to be met.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
National Assembly Bill 691: Presumption of self-defense for law-enforcement officers
Relevant passage: Article unique and statement of reasons
About this source
Original bill filed by Éric Pauget and co-sponsors. It proposed a Penal Code presumption of self-defense for national police, municipal police and gendarmes, subject to rebuttal if an investigation established manifest disproportionality or lack of absolute necessity.
- Published
- Accessed