EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 20.7.2021 SWD(2021) 712 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 2021 Rule of Law Report









Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France Accompanying the COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 2021 Rule of Law Report









The rule of law situation in the European Union {COM(2021) 700 final} - {SWD(2021) 701 final} - {SWD(2021) 702 final} - {SWD(2021) 703 final} - {SWD(2021) 704 final} - {SWD(2021) 705 final} - {SWD(2021) 706 final} - {SWD(2021) 707 final} - {SWD(2021) 708 final} - {SWD(2021) 709 final} - {SWD(2021) 710 final} - {SWD(2021) 711 final} - {SWD(2021) 713 final} - {SWD(2021) 714 final} - {SWD(2021) 715 final} - {SWD(2021) 716 final} - {SWD(2021) 717 final} - {SWD(2021) 718 final} - {SWD(2021) 719 final} - {SWD(2021) 720 final} - {SWD(2021) 721 final} - {SWD(2021) 722 final} - {SWD(2021) 723 final} - {SWD(2021) 724 final} - {SWD(2021) 725 final} - {SWD(2021) 726 final} - {SWD(2021) 727 final}



Abstract The French justice system continues to undergo a number of reforms aimed at improving its quality and efficiency. Long-standing initiatives to strengthen judicial independence, in particular by reinforcing the competences of the High Council for the Judiciary, have not advanced towards adoption, which would require a qualified majority of the votes cast by both chambers of Parliament. The resources devoted to the justice system received a significant increase. Projects aimed at achieving full digitalisation of the criminal procedure and some aspects of the civil procedure continue to advance. Two new draft laws to reinforce trust in the justice system cover issues such as the professional secrecy for lawyers, the creation of disciplinary courts for law professionals, and the broadcasting of hearings. The President of the Republic requested the High Council for the Judiciary to provide an opinion on ways to improve the regime for liability and protection of magistrates. France has continued to strengthen its institutional framework for fighting and preventing corruption in the public and private sector. The specialised anti-corruption institutions, such as the High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life and the French Anti-corruption Agency, continue to perform their duties. Regulations for conflict of interest and the protection of whistleblowers are in place. While the lobbying legislation in place does not cover individuals initiating contact with senior officials, the Government has not put forward any proposal to this end yet. Assets declarations are disclosed and regularly verified. The National Financial Prosecutor was reorganised, and continues to show a robust record of convictions, also through public interest judicial agreements, including for high-rank officials and large-value cases. The human resources of the National Commission on Campaign Accounts and Political Financing appear insufficient compared to its workload. Specific public procurement actions were introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. France possesses a generally robust legal framework safeguarding media pluralism and freedom. An upcoming legislative change might result in an institutional reorganisation of the national media regulatory authority and creation of a single body in charge of audiovisual and digital communication. Journalists continue to be exposed to different types of threats. In view of the increase in attacks occurring during protests or demonstrations, the Government aims to implement measures to improve the communication between journalists and police forces during such events. French authorities envisaged a comprehensive recovery plan for media outlets to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as to support the transformation of the media sector. Impact assessments and stakeholder consultations are frequent in the legislative process. However, the Government has significantly increased fast-track adoption procedures, limiting parliamentary debate on some sensitive draft laws. The emergency regime for the COVID-19 pandemic ended on 1 June 2021. Other measures affecting fundamental rights were reviewed by the Constitutional Council and the Council of State, which rejected a Government request to consider whether a ruling of the European Court of Justice could be in breach of the principle of conferral and the division of competences between the EU and its Member States. Independent authorities kept playing a very active role in safeguarding fundamental rights during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Defender of Rights acknowledged the need to improve the follow-up of its recommendations by national authorities. Recent legislation raises concerns as to its potential impact on the landscape for civil society. In particular, the new Law on Global Security received strong criticism from stakeholders and independent authorities, and the Constitutional Council declared some of its provisions unconstitutional, in particular the one aimed at protecting the anonymity of police officers on duty. I.Justice System The justice system is composed of two autonomous branches of courts: ordinary courts with jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases on the one hand, and administrative courts on the other hand. Both branches consist of three levels of courts, with first instance courts, courts of appeal and an upper court (the Court of Cassation and the Council of State, respectively). The Council of State also has an advisory branch that provides opinions on draft legislation, and is tasked with the management of the administrative tribunals and courts of appeal. The Constitutional Council is competent to verify the constitutionality of laws. The High Council for the Judiciary, half of whose members are magistrates elected by their peers, plays an important role in safeguarding judicial independence. It nominates candidates for top judicial functions and, as regards the appointment of judges by the Minister of Justice, issues binding opinions . The prosecution service is part of the judiciary, and falls under the authority of the Minister of Justice. The latter can give general instructions on prosecution policy but is barred from giving instructions in individual cases. France participates in the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). Lawyers are represented by various bar associations throughout France. Independence The level of perceived independence is average among both companies and the general public. Among the general population, 57% consider the level of independence of courts to be ‘fairly or very good’, as well as 58% of businesses. While the perceived level of independence has remained largely stable since 2016 for the general population, it has decreased among companies over the last year. In both cases, the reason most often invoked for the perceived lack of judicial independence is related to interference or pressure from the Government and politicians. The long-standing constitutional reform to reinforce the competences of the High Council for the Judiciary has not advanced. The constitutional reform would in particular make the opinion of the High Council for the Judiciary on the nomination of candidate-prosecutors binding upon the executive, make the High Council the competent body to decide on disciplinary measures regarding prosecutors, put an end to the right of former Presidents of the Republic to become members of the Constitutional Council after their service and abolish the Court of Justice of the Republic. A report on obstacles to judicial independence established by a parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on 2 September 2020 stressed the importance to carry out this constitutional reform. The report proposes to strengthen even further the role of the High Council, in particular by aligning fully the disciplinary and appointment rules for prosecutors with those applicable for judges and by giving the High Council the power to act on its own initiative on any issue related to the independence of the judiciary. For the draft constitutional law to advance towards adoption, the President would need to convene both chambers of Parliament in Congress to vote on it, requiring a qualified majority of three fifths of the votes cast. The need to strengthen the disciplinary powers of the High Council was further highlighted in the context of administrative investigations ordered against three prosecutors of the National Financial Prosecutor's Office (PNF) by the Minister of Justice, which are currently pending and could lead to disciplinary procedures. Three magistrates’ trade unions filed a complaint against the Minister of Justice, invoking conflicts of interests related to his previous activity as a lawyer. The Court of Justice of the Republic declared the complaint admissible and opened a judicial investigation on 13 January 2021. On 23 February 2021, the President of the Republic submitted to the High Council for the Judiciary a request for an opinion regarding both the liability and protection of magistrates. One of the aims is to make the system of complaints by litigants more effective to better address cases of professional deficiencies by magistrates. Two new draft laws aim at increasing trust in the justice system. On 14 April 2021, the Minister of Justice submitted to the Council of Ministers two draft laws to reinforce trust in the justice system, which would in particular improve the protection of professional secrecy for defence lawyers, create national disciplinary courts for law professionals, which would also be tasked with drafting a code of ethics, and widen the possibility to film and broadcast hearings to promote the understanding of the justice system among the general public. Quality Several projects are being implemented to develop further the digitalisation of justice. Despite efforts to improve the level of digitalisation of the justice system, there is still room for improvement as regards procedural rules allowing digital technology in courts, use of digital technology and electronic communication tools by courts and prosecution services, as well as digital solutions to initiate, conduct and follow proceedings. In criminal matters, a project called “digital criminal procedure” is following its course. Its aim is to digitalise all steps of the procedure, from the registration of a complaint or the finding of an offense to the delivery of the judgment and the filing of the court decision, as well as to ease access to the file for the parties and law professionals. The implementation of the various tools to digitalise communication between all actors in the criminal procedure as well as all documents in the file started experimentally in 2019 in two courts and will be gradually extended to all courts. In civil matters, the PORTALIS programme aims to replace all eight existing applications used in courts with a single digital tool and ultimately achieve full digitalisation of the civil procedure for both litigants and justice professionals, from the application until the service of the court decision on a secure portal. The first step was achieved with the launch of a website directed at litigants, which allows to them to lodge applications in some civil matters since 4 January 2021. Similarly, the possibility to submit requests for legal aid online, which started in pilot courts in March 2021 and will be gradually rolled out at national level, combined with new harmonised rules for calculating the applicants’ resources, is expected to reduce significantly the time necessary to process such requests. The PORTALIS tool will be made operational in 2021 within the labour court, then extended to other courts by 2022. The resources devoted to the justice system have further increased significantly in 2021 . Under the Finance Law for 2021, the Ministry of Justice is thus allocated a budget of 12.1 billion euros, or about 2% of total public expenditure, which represents an increase of 8% compared to the previous year (the highest year-on-year increase in over 20 years), including additional 127 million euros allocated to legal costs. The Finance Law also creates 2,450 positions for the justice system, which represents an increase of around 3% for a total of around 90,000 positions. The budget for legal aid reached 585 million euros in 2021, a 10% increase allowing to improve the remuneration of lawyers under this regime, in particular for certain missions in criminal matters and mediation. A new guarantee of remuneration of the lawyer regardless of failures on the part of the applicant for legal aid was also created. The bar associations consider that compensation for lawyers for legal aid remains largely insufficient and does not cover the lawyers’ costs. Several measures relating to the functioning of the criminal justice system introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic were annulled. The Constitutional Council declared unconstitutional the automatic prolongation of the duration of pre-trial detention instituted by an Order of 25 March 2020 and implemented during the lockdown until 11 May 2020, due to its automatic character and the absence of systematic judicial review of the necessity of the extension within a short deadline, having regard to the right to individual liberty. In a Decision of 5 March 2021, the Council of State also ruled that this automatic extension was contrary to the right to liberty enshrined in Art. 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and that the possibility for the judge in lower criminal courts to impose the use of videoconferencing or communication by telephone infringes the right to a fair trial protected by Art. 6 of the ECHR. By Order of 27 November 2020, the Council of State had already suspended the use of videoconferencing without the consent of the accused for hearings before higher criminal courts, on the grounds that it constitutes seriously and manifestly unlawful interference with the rights of defence and the right to a fair trial. Efficiency Measures are being taken to mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the efficiency of civil and criminal courts, but overall concerns remain with the length of procedures. The emergency measures taken to deal with the health crisis, in particular between March and May 2020, led to a slowdown in the activity of the courts and an increase in their caseload. Thus, as of October 2020, civil courts saw their caseload increased by nearly 43,000 and lower criminal courts by 19,000 cases as compared to the end of 2019. The estimated time needed to resolve litigious civil and commercial cases continued increasing, with an average time of 432 days in 2019. On the other hand, the clearance rate for litigious civil and commercial cases improved slightly to 99.7% for 2019, but this figure precedes the effects of the pandemic. In order to address the challenges faced by criminal courts, a new law of 8 April 2021 to improve the efficiency of local justice and criminal proceedings extends the alternative measures to prosecution, extends the scope of measures applicable as part of a composition pénale and permits out-of-court execution of community service. II.Anti-Corruption Framework Authorities involved in the fight against corruption include the Anti-Corruption Agency (which prepares the multiannual anti-corruption plan and supports private and public legal persons on how to prevent and detect corruption), the High Authority for the Transparency of Public life (responsible for ensuring the integrity of public institutions and officials), and the Central Office for Combating Corruption and Tax Offences (a special police for the investigation of economic crimes, including corruption and money laundering). The National Financial Prosecutor is competent for the investigation of high-level corruption cases.

The perception among experts and business executives is that the level of corruption in the public sector remains relatively low. In the 2020 Corruption Perceptions Index by Transparency International, France scores 69/100 and ranks 8th in the European Union and 23th globally. This perception has been relatively stable over the past five years. The national anticorruption plan for 2020-2022 is being implemented. The plan focuses on the following actions: i) optimising data analysis to improve understanding and detection of corruption; ii) training and awareness-raising for public employees; iii-a) supporting ministries to establish anti-corruption programmes; iii-b) support major municipalities and their establishments to establish anti-corruption programmes; iii-c) promoting integrity in sports organisations and events; iii-d) supporting businesses in implementing the French anti-corruption framework and encouraging them to make anti-corruption compliance a means of boosting their competitiveness; iii-e) enhancing corruption penalties; and iv) enhancing France’s international action. The prosecution and adjudication of corruption cases show positive results, including for cases involving high-ranking officials. National legislation criminalises all forms of corruption offences (active, passive, domestic and/or foreign bribery) in the public and private sector, including in the field of sports and influence peddling in the public sector. The Central Office for Combating Corruption and Tax Offences (OCLCIFF) is a special police for the investigation of economic crimes, including corruption and money laundering. The Office has 86 officials, divided into units for financial data analysis, research and collection of evidence. In 2020, the office confiscated EUR 166 million in illegal assets . However, recruiting, training (sometimes for three years) and retaining highly skilled human resources, in particular the financial data analysts and experienced investigators, represent a challenge for the Office . The National Financial Prosecutor’s Office has been reorganised in order to improve effectiveness, including through supplementary resources and increased independence. In 2020, the National Financial Prosecutor (PNF) has established a special squad for the research of evidence through open-source databanks. In 2020, the PNF initiated 123 new cases, leading to 21 indictments, for an estimated aggregated value of EUR 2 billion, and with 65 individuals involved. There have been a total of 12 public interest judicial agreements (CJIPs) concluded to date. In response to the recommendations of the Group of States against Corruption of the Council of Europe (GRECO), for 2021 the PNF envisages to hire additional prosecutors. However, regarding the other recommendations of GRECO, no relevant actions were reported. The Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) prepares the multiannual anti-corruption plan and monitors the implementation of preventive measures in public (national or local) and private entities. In September 2020, the AFA published a study analysing the anti-corruption programmes of private companies and a practical guide for companies in the area of gifts and hospitality. In 2021, after a public consultation, the AFA issued a second generation of recommendations (the first set was issued in 2017), on developing and implementing a compliance mechanisms for legal persons. The technical and financial resources available to the AFA are considered appropriate by its management. While the officials working at the AFA have experience both in the public sector (mostly seconded investigators, prosecutors, but also financial data analysts) and in the private sector, the size and high turnover of its staff appear to be a challenge. The High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life (HATVP) continues monitoring the implementation of the integrity rules for public officials, including those on asset disclosures . The HATVP is responsible for ensuring the integrity of public institutions and officials. Its tasks includes the verifications of asset and interest declarations. In 2020, the HATVP received 17 713 declarations of interest and assets from public officials, and 825 from ministers and members of Parliament. While the declarations of officials and ministers are public, those of members of Parliament are available only on request. The control performed in 2020 by the HATVP indicates that about 53% of declarations were compliant, 22% prompted minor clarification requests, and 25% had substantial deficiencies. In 2020, ten files were transmitted to the National Financial Prosecutor’s Office, for possible criminal follow-up. The HATVP advises institutional ethic officials (responsables déontologues) supporting them in ethics training and education. The HATVP also issues more general ethics guidelines, and it may sign agreements with NGOs, to promote transparency. The HATVP has proposed to amend the lobbying legislationfor the management of the lobbying register. In November 2020, the rate of declarations received was at 90% of registered lobbyists. In 2020, the HATVP suggested that the lobbying legislation should be amended, as recommended by GRECO, in order to include lobbying individuals (and not only the organisations) initiating the contact with senior officials. No proposal has been put forward by the Government to date. In 2020, the HATVP’s mandate was extended to oversee the implementation of the rules on incompatibilities and revolving doors. On average, 10% of the controlled cases reveal an incompatibility. In 2020, the HATVP issued a decision of incompatibility for a former adviser to a ministerial cabinet. The human resources of the National Commission on Campaign Accounts and Political Financing (CNCCFP) appear insufficient compared to its workload. The CNCCFP is the body that audits both political parties and electoral campaigns’ accounting reports. The election department comprises nine magistrates (seconded by the Court of Audit and other judiciary institutions), in addition to 58 assisting officials. In 2020, 2 200 cases were audited, with the support of 143 external advisers. On average, up to 4% of the election campaigns’ reports have a problem of accounting. The department for auditing political parties has six officials and, given the workload, providing accurate and detailed accounting reports within the procedural deadline of six months from the election day remains a challenge. The Ethics Commissioner of the National Assembly monitors the implementation of the ethics rules for Members of Parliament. Ethics rules for members of Parliament are included in the regulation of the National Assembly, as well as in a code of ethics. Members of Parliament in a situation of conflict of interest are to inform the Bureau of the National Assembly and to withdraw from participating in a conflicting vote. Any donation, sponsorship and travel allowances received by a Member of Parliament must be declared and then published on the transparency page of the National Assembly. In case of suspicions of any breach of ethics rules, the Ethics Commissioner may bring a case to the attention of the President of the Assembly, who may then forward the file to the Bureau of the Assembly, for further consideration and possible action. The Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA) issued recommendations on the development of mechanisms for whistleblowers. In light of the existing regulations for whistleblower protection, the recommendations issued in January 2021 aim at helping public and private sector entities to prevent and detect bribery, influence peddling, extortion by public officials, illegal taking of interest, misappropriation of public funds and favouritism. Whistleblowers can submit their complaints first through the channel existing within their company or their public administration and, under specific circumstances, the complaint may then be submitted to AFA. The Defender of Rights provides support and advice to whistleblowers, including a guide. The Defender of Rights has one full-time officer for the counselling unit. Since 2017, on average the Defender of Rights has dealt with 80 whistleblower reports per year, while in 2020, a decrease of almost 20% was registered. The lack of proper financial and legal support is a challenge for the practical protection of whistleblowers. Specific anti-corruption guidance was issued in the area of public procurement to mitigate risks during the COVID-19 pandemic. In June 2020, the Anti-Corruption Agency and the State Procurement Directorate (DAE) published guidelines on “Managing the risk of corruption in the public procurement cycle”. For each phase of the public procurement, the guidelines indicate the associated risks of corruption, suggest mitigation measures, and give recommendations on how to develop organisational risk mapping and anticorruption codes of conduct. III.Media Pluralism and Media Freedom The French Constitution safeguards freedom of expression and information as well as pluralism and independence of the media. These principles are further enshrined in the sectoral legislation, enforced by the independent media regulator. The French media pluralism framework secures both ‘external pluralism’, defined in terms of the plurality of media actors as well as ‘internal pluralism’, defined in terms of equity and diversity of voices. French legal system also provides for specific rules concerning transparency of media ownership. France has adopted several acts aiming to transpose the revised AVMSD and three additional decrees are still envisaged to complete the transposition process. The national media regulator, Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel (CSA), will undergo institutional changes. The Government has recently presented a proposal allowing the merger of the Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel (CSA) with the Haute Autorité pour la Diffusion des Œuvres et la Protection des Droits sur Internet (HADOPI), the intellectual property protection authority, in order to create a single body in charge of audiovisual and digital communication (ARCOM). This would result in attributing to ARCOM a set of competencies related to minors’ protection online, disinformation, hate speech and online piracy. The CSA welcomed the Government’s proposal outlining, however, some concerns related to the budget and the composition of the new body. The proposal envisages that the ARCOM will be subject to the same independence guarantees as the CSA and the HADOPI. As in 2020, the 2021 Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) assessed the risks to the independence and effectiveness of the French media regulator at low level, highlighting that the authority possesses an autonomous budget, and its operation, including appointment of its members, is transparent. The French Journalistic Council deontological standards. T, composed of representatives of journalists, publishers and the public examines alleged breaches of journalistic standards in press articles (both texts and images, published offline and online) and in audiovisual news programs. Since its establishment in 2019, the Council has recorded almost 411 cases of breach and published 34 notices. The CSA recommended initiating a reflection on the media ownership framework. On 22 March 2021, the CSA issued an opinion stating that the current anti-concentration framework is outdated in several aspects in light of the demographic, economic and technological developments in this sector. The CSA suggested that the Government initiates an expert group to work on this issue. The French legal system provides for the obligation of the publication of all direct and ultimate owners of media outlets. The allocation of frequencies for audiovisual services is also dependent on the information on the owner of the service requesting it. Media ownership concentration is controlled by the Competition Authority, which should consult the CSA when audiovisual media or radio are concerned. The 2021 MPM reports low risk to media ownership transparency, mentioning, however, that the multilayered ownership structure of numerous media conglomerates might create a certain degree of opacity. On the other hand, the 2021 MPM reports persisting high levels of horizontal and cross-media concentration. French authorities allocated substantial financial support for media outlets. In 2020, in order to mitigate the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the French Government allocated EUR 106 million to guarantee the continuity of press distribution and support the most affected media actors - newsagents, overseas titles and publishers. All media workers, including freelancers, were eligible to short-time work compensation too. With regards to the long-term support, the comprehensive recovery plan envisages EUR 377 million over the next two years to support the digital and ecological transitions of the media sector. This also includes a fund of EUR 18 million to support the journalists in the most precarious situation, such as freelancers, photojournalists and cartoonists. The French Government also envisaged changes to the framework of financial support for newsagents, especially with regards to the application conditions and the methods of the financial aid calculation. Journalists in France continue to be exposed to different types of threats. Attacks on journalists and media workers, both from the side of protestors and police forces, have been reported during protests and demonstrations. In this context, the Government commissioned an independent report, which includes a set of proposals for measures geared at improving safety of journalists as well as their communication with police forces during protests and demonstrations. The Council of State also declared illegal four provisions of the Plan of the Maintenance of the Order, which limited the operation of journalists during protests or demonstrations. Worrying developments have been observed in relation to confidentiality of reporters’ sources, threats of physical violence or cases of online harassment, especially of female journalists. The Council of Europe’s Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists recorded fifteen alerts for France since October 2020, the majority of which concerned physical attacks, harassment and intimidation of journalists. The 2021 MPM highlights that the frequent use of the state of emergency and a very broad definition of disinformation might also affect negatively the situation of journalists. The Constitutional Council invalidated controversial provisions which could have affected the activities of journalists. Following the critical reception by the journalistic community of the draft law on “Global security”, the Government proposed significant changes to the draft provision criminalising the dissemination of images showing the face or other identifying characteristics of a member of the national police or of the gendarmerie participating in a police operation. The legislative text, adopted in April 2021, included a new offence consisting in the malicious dissemination of the image of law enforcement officers in the exercise of their duties with the obvious intent to damage their physical or psychological integrity (Article 52.1). The Constitutional Council declared this article incompatible with the French Constitution, due to the lack of legal certainty stemming from the imprecise formulation of this provision. The decision of the Constitutional Council was welcomed by the media stakeholders. The Government representatives declared willingness to propose a revised version of the article.

IV.Other Institutional Issues related to Checks and Balances France has a semi-presidential system of government, with a President directly elected by the people and a Prime Minister who is accountable to Parliament. The bicameral Parliament consists of the National Assembly and the Senate. Legislative proposals can originate from the Government or from members of both Houses of Parliament. The Constitutional Council scrutinises the constitutionality of laws, before or after their adoption. Independent authorities play an important role in the system of checks and balances. Impact assessments and stakeholder consultations are frequent in the legislative process, though not mandatory in all cases. The number of published impact assessments accompanying draft laws initiated by Government increased to 25 out of 61 draft laws in 2020, from a yearly average of nine. Involving stakeholders and the public is not mandatory for the development of new laws; according to the Council of State, informal consultations, including meetings with stakeholders, and consultations through consultative committees are frequent. After nine months of deliberations, the Citizens Convention for Climate submitted their proposals to the Government, which published its draft law on climate on 10 February 2021. Moreover, following a proposal of the Convention, the President committed to hold a referendum to introduce a climate clause in the Constitution. The use of fast-track and accelerated procedures, conceived for exceptional cases, has increased significantly. In the last parliamentary session (2019-2020), 37 out of 58 laws were adopted under the accelerated procedure. Since the beginning of the parliamentary term in the National Assembly, 57% of the laws were debated following this procedure. Thus, the accelerated procedure, originally conceived as an exception, is becoming the norm, even for laws with a significant impact on individual freedoms, which would therefore require an extensive parliamentary debate. The emergency regime introduced in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic has been extended several times and ended on 1 June 2021. Established for two months by the law of 23 March 2020, the state of health emergency was extended until 10 July 2020. Then, the law of 9 July 2020 set up a transitional regime from 11 July authorising the Government to take exceptional measures to deal with the epidemic until 31 October 2020. The national state of health emergency was again declared by decree as of 17 October 2020 and its extension was authorised by law twice, first until 16 February 2021 and then until 1 June 2021. It allowed the Government to adopt a range of measures by decree in order to address the pandemic. On 27 May 2021, the Parliament adopted a law on the management of the exit from the health crisis, which creates a transitional regime applicable after the lifting of the state of health emergency, from 2 June to 30 September 2021. The Constitutional Council declared constitutional several provisions of the law contested by a group of deputies. The highest courts were called to review measures affecting fundamental rights. The Constitutional Council reviewed the validity of the Law authorising the extension of the state of health emergency until 16 February 2021 and introducing measures to tackle the health crisis, and annulled the automatic prolongation of the duration of pre-trial detention. From March 2020 to March 2021, the Council of State ruled in urgent proceedings on 647 applications challenging the Government's management of the pandemic and ordered measures or suspended acts of the public authorities in 51 cases. In particular, the Council of State suspended the mandatory use of videoconferencing during hearings in criminal proceedings, regulated the use of drones by the police to monitor demonstrations and ruled that clients must be able to consult their lawyer even after curfew. In 51 cases in which the application was formally rejected, the exchanges during the hearings still led the Government to take corrective measures, and the Council of State reminded the State of its duties or specified its obligations in about 130 cases. The Council of State has given other important rulings in relation with fundamental rights, including a judgment on data retention which raises concerns as regards its interplay with the legal order of the European Union. In this last judgment, referring to the binding nature of rulings of the Court of Justice, the Council of State nevertheless rejected the request of the Government to consider whether a ruling from the European Court of Justice could be in breach of the principle of conferral and the division of competences between the Union and its Member States. Independent authorities have played an active role in defending of fundamental rights throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2020, the Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l’Homme (CNCDH) published 18 opinions in the exercise of its mandate of scrutinising the authorities’ compliance with fundamental rights standards, sometimes acting on its own initiative regarding draft laws for which it was not consulted by the Government and issuing specific recommendations to ensure compliance with constitutional principles and individual freedoms. This approach of advocating for legislative amendments is in line with the recommendation from the GANHRI Sub-committee on Accreditation (SCA), which encouraged the CNCDH to continue to broaden its activities in relation to its protection mandate. The Defender of Rights also maintained the continuity of its activities. In 2020, it processed in total 96,894 complaints and 69,705 calls, representing a 10% increase from the previous year, and issued 234 recommendations. However, in order to strengthen the rights of those who seize it, the Defender of Rights acknowledged the need to improve the follow-up of its recommendations by national authorities, noting that only 56% received an answer in 2019, 31% of which were refusals. The Defender of Rights also issued two opinions on the legal regime of the state of health emergency in order to ensure that the legislative and regulatory measures taken to fight the pandemic respect the rights and freedoms of individuals and guarantee equal treatment. Recent legislation raises concerns as to its potential impact on the landscape for civil society. France is still considered to have a narrowed civil society landscape, and restrictions imposed during the pandemic to public gatherings, in particular their implementation by local authorities, have generated further concerns in this respect. The new Law on Global Security, adopted by Parliament on 15 April 2021, received considerable criticism from various stakeholders and independent authorities for its potential impact on the freedoms of expression and of information and the right to protest. It provides the possibility, for police patrols, to carry cameras and use drones to transmit the images of demonstrators and bystanders live to a command centre, and created a new offence consisting in the malicious dissemination of the image of law enforcement officers in the exercise of their duties with the obvious intent to damage their physical or psychological integrity. This new offence was strongly criticised for its impact on the right to information, considering the importance of reports from witnesses other than professional journalists. To address these concerns, the Prime Minister decided to submit the law in its entirety to the Constitutional Council. The latter declared unconstitutional several provisions, including the article creating the abovementioned new offence, and formulated reservations as regard other provisions. A draft law to “reinforce respect for the republican principles”, submitted to Parliament on 9 December 2020, was also criticised for the restrictions it might impose on the freedom of association and of expression. In particular, the provisions instituting control of foreign funding of religious associations above a certain threshold, extending of the grounds for dissolution of associations, including for acts committed by its members, as well as imposing an obligation to sign a broadly defined “contract of republican commitment” on association requesting subsidies generate concerns both at national and European level. Annex I: List of sources in alphabetical order* * The list of contributions received in the context of the consultation for the 2021 Rule of Law report can be found at at https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-law/rule-law/rule-law-mechanism/2021-rule-law-report-targeted-stakeholder-consultation . Agence Française Anticorruption (2020), Activity Report ( https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/RA_AFA_2020_V2_WEB.pdf ). Agence Française Anticorruption (2020), Anticorruption Plan for 2020-2022 ( https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/RA_AFA_2020_ENG_Version_Finale.pdf ). Agence Française Anticorruption (2020), Guidelines on managing the risk of corruption in the public procurement cycle ( https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/Guide_maitrise_risque_corruption-Hyperlien.pdf ). Agence Française Anticorruption (2020), Guidelines on the development of mechanisms for whistleblowers ( https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/Recommandations%20AFA.pdf ). Agence Française Anticorruption (2020), National diagnosis on anti-corruption systems in companies ( https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/Diagnostic%20national%20sur%20les%20dispositifs%20anticorruption%20dans%20les%20entreprises.pdf ). Agence Française Anticorruption (2020), Practical guide for companies in the area of gifts and hospitality ( https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/Guide%20pratique%20politique%20cadeaux%20et%20invitations.pdf ). Agence Française Anticorruption (2021), Recommendations, Official Journal of 12 January 2021 ( https://www.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr/files/files/Recommandations%20AFA.pdf ). Agence Française Anticorruption, Director (2020), Hearing with representatives of the National Assembly, in April 2021 ( video available at http://videos.assemblee-nationale.fr/video.10597957_60656dae755b9.lutte-contre-la-corruption--m-charles-duchaine-directeur-de-l-agence-francaise-anticorruption-1-avril-2021 ).

L’Assemblée citoyenne des originaires de turque and others (2021), Joint letter to senators on 7 April 2021 ( https://www.ldh-france.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Lettre-aux-senatrices-et-senateurs-avec-les-derniers-signataires.pdf ). Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (2021), Media pluralism monitor 2021. Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel (2021), Opinion on the draft law on the protection of public access to cultural works in the digital age and the draft law on the protection of public access to cultural works, 22 March 2021 ( https://www.csa.fr/Reguler/Espace-juridique/Les-textes-reglementaires-du-CSA/Avis-du-CSA-au-gouvernement/Avis-du-22-mars-2021-sur-le-projet-de-loi-organique-relatif-a-la-protection-de-l-acces-du-public-aux-oeuvres-culturelles-a-l-ere-numerique-et-le-projet-de-loi-relatif-a-la-protection-de-l-acces-de-l-acces-du-public-aux-oeuvres-culturelles ). Council of Europe: Committee of Ministers (2010), Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities. Council of Europe, Expert Council on NGO Law of the Conference of INGOs (2021), Opinion of 31 March 2021 on the compatibility with the European standards of the bill to ensure respect for the principles of the republic by all ( https://rm.coe.int/opinion-on-the-bill-to-ensure-respect-for-the-principles-of-the-republ/1680a1f40e ). Council of Europe, Website ( https://www.coe.int/en/web/media-freedom/france ). Council of Europe, Platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists (2020), alert of 16 December 2020, Two Media Workers Injured in Knife Attack (https://www.coe.int/en/web/media-freedom/detail-alert?p_p_id=sojdashboard_WAR_coesojportlet&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_col_id=column-3&p_p_col_count=7&_sojdashboard_WAR_coesojportlet_alertPK=78942550). Defender of Rights (2021), 2020 Annual Activity Report ( https://www.defenseurdesdroits.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/ddd_rapport-annuel-2020_25-03-2021.pdf ). Defender of Rights (2020), Opinion 20-03, of 27 April 2020, relating to the implementation of the state of health emergency to deal with the covid-19 pandemic, as well as orders and decrees taken for its application ( https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/doc_num.php?explnum_id=19735 ). Defender of Rights (2020), Opinion 20-06, of 17 November 2020, on the text adopted by the Law Commission on the draft law on global security ( https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=35092&opac_view=-1&lang_sel=en_UK ). Defender of Rights (2020), Opinion 20-10, of 3 December 2020, on the legal regime of the state of health emergency ( https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/doc_num.php?explnum_id=20282 ). Defender of Rights (2020), Opinion 20-12, of 16 December 2020, on the implementation of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law (https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/doc_num.php?explnum_id=20315). Defender of Rights (2021), Opinion 21-01, of 12 January 2021, on the draft law to reinforce the respect of the principles of the Republic ( https://juridique.defenseurdesdroits.fr/doc_num.php?explnum_id=20384 ). Délégation des Barreaux (2021), Contribution from the Délégation des Barreaux de France for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. Directorate-General for Communication (2019), Flash Eurobarometer 482: businesses’ attitudes towards corruption in the EU. Directorate-General for Communication (2020), Special Eurobarometer 502: corruption. European Civic Forum (2021), Contribution from European Civic Forum for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. European Commission (2020), Rule of Law Report, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in France. European Commission (2021), EU Justice Scoreboard. European Commission (2018), Study on the implementation of the new provisions in the revised Audiovisual Media Services Directive ( https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/study-implementation-new-provisions-revised-audiovisual-media-services-directive-avmsd ).

European Federation of Journalists, Website ( https://europeanjournalists.org/blog/database/covid-19-what-financial-support-has-the-media-and-journalists-received-in-europe/ ). French Constitutional Council, Decision no. 2020-808 DC of 13 November 2020. French Constitutional Council, Decision no. 2020-878/879 QPC of 29 January 2021. French Constitutional Council, Decision no. 2021-817 DC of 20 May 2021. French Constitutional Council, Decision no. 2021-819 DC of 31 May 2021. French Council of State (2021), Contribution by the Council of State for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. French Council of State, Order of 27 November 2020 French Council of State, Decision of 22 December 2020. French Council of State, Decision of 3 March 2021. French Council of State, Decision of 5 March 2021. French Council of State, Decision of 21 April 2021. French Council of State, Order of 18 May 2020. French Council of State, Decision of 10 June 2021. French Council of State, Decision of 13 June 2020 French Council of State, Decision of 6 July 2020. French Government (2021), Input from France for the 2021 Rule of Law Report. French Government (2021), Report of 2 April 2021 of the Independent Commission on the Relationship between the Press and the Law Enforcement Authorities ( https://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/document/document/2021/05/rapport_commission_independante_sur_les_relations_entre_le_presse_et_les_forces_de_lordre.pdf ). French Journalistic Council, Website ( https://cdjm.org/decisions/). French Ministry of Culture (2020), Press release of 27 August 2020 ( https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Presse/Communiques-de-presse/Annonce-du-plan-de-soutien-a-la-filiere-presse ). French Ministry of Culture (2021), Press release of 8 April 2021 ( https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Presse/Communiques-de-presse/Presentation-en-conseil-des-ministres-du-projet-de-loi-relatif-a-la-regulation-et-a-la-protection-de-l-acces-aux-aeuvres-culturelles-a-l-ere-numerique ).

French Ministry of Culture, Website, ( https://www.culture.gouv.fr/Sites-thematiques/Presse/Aides-a-la-Presse/L-aide-a-la-modernisation-des-diffuseurs ). French National Assembly, Bureau of the Assembly, Summaries of the meetings ( https://www2.assemblee-nationale.fr/15/le-bureau-de-l-assemblee-nationale ). French Parliament, Commission of Inquiry (2020), Report on obstacles to judicial independence ( https://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/15/rapports/cejustice/l15b3296_rapport-enquete ). Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI), Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) (2019), Report of March 2019. GRECO (2020), Fifth Evaluation Round – Evaluation Report on France. High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life, Opinions at the request of ethics officers ( https://www.hatvp.fr/consulter-les-deliberations-et-avis /). Le Monde (2021), Law “global security”, The Constitutional Court censures ex-article 24 (Loi « sécurité globale » : le Conseil constitutionnel censure l’ex-article 24) ( https://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2021/05/20/le-conseil-constitutionnel-censure-l-ex-article-24-de-la-proposition-de-loi-securite-globale_6080897_3224.html ) . Observatoire des libertés et du numérique (2020), Communication of 12 November 2020. National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (CNCDH) (2020), Opinion of 26 November 2020, on the proposition of law on global security. National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (CNCDH) (2021), First opinion, of 28 January 2021, on the draft law to reinforce the respect of the principles of the Republic to the accelerated legislative procedure ( https://www.cncdh.fr/sites/default/files/a_-_2021_-_1_-_pjl_principes_de_la_republique_janv_2021.pdf ). National Consultative Commission on Human Rights (CNCDH) (2021), Second opinion, of 25 March 2021, on the draft law to reinforce the respect of the principles of the Republic ( https://www.cncdh.fr/sites/default/files/a_-_2021_-_4_-_2nd_avis_sur_le_pjl_principes_de_la_republique_mars_2021.pdf ). Reporters Without Borders, Website ( https://rsf.org/en/france ). The Local (2021), France’s constitutional court rejects proposed law limiting filming of police officers ( https://www.thelocal.fr/20210520/frances-constitutional-court-rejects-proposed-law-limiting-filming-of-police-officers/ ). Transparency International (2021), Corruption Perceptions Index 2020. Union Syndicale des Magistrats (2020), Syndicat de la Magistrature, Open letter, of 21 December 2020. Annex II: Country visit to France The Commission services held virtual meetings in April 2021 with: ·Agence France Presse ·Anti-Corruption Agency

·Central Office for Combating Corruption and Tax Offenses ·Council of State ·Defender of rights ·Delegation of the Bars of France ·Ethics Commissioner of the National Assembly ·High Authority for the Transparency of Public Life ·High Council for the Audiovisual ·High Council for the Judiciary ·Journalistic Ethics and Mediation Council ·Ministry of Justice ·National Consultative Commission on Human Rights ·National Council of Bar Associations ·National Financial Prosecutor ·National Journalists Union ·Reporters without Borders ·Syndicat de la Magistrature ·Union syndicale des magistrats * The Commission also met the following organisations in a number of horizontal meetings: ·Amnesty International

·Center for Reproductive Rights ·CIVICUS ·Civil Liberties Union for Europe ·Civil Society Europe ·Conference of European Churches ·EuroCommerce ·European Center for Not-for-Profit Law ·European Centre for Press and Media Freedom ·European Civic Forum ·European Federation of Journalists ·European Partnership for Democracy ·European Youth Forum ·Front Line Defenders ·Human Rights House Foundation ·Human Rights Watch ·ILGA-Europe ·International Commission of Jurists ·International Federation for Human Rights ·International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN) ·International Press Institute