5 ms·

One thing brought up in the article is that currently French surveillance services are basically working carte blanche, with absolutely no legal checks. Le Mon

by rtpg 12y ago

One thing brought up in the article is that currently French surveillance services are basically working carte blanche, with absolutely no legal checks. Le Monde had a set of articles about some of this surveillance framework brought to light by the Snowden leaks, but of course the French press didn't talk about it, since the NSA stories were somehow "more relevant to the public". For all the fingerpointing at the US for the Patriot act and the NSA, France's surveillance state is pretty ominous and there are basically no rules.

mercurial 12y ago
Precisely. The US has rules which do not work, and France is a free-for-all (I suspect with an added emphasis on "economic intelligence").
linschn 12y ago
There are rules, and the fact that the French government break those all the time is no excuse when finally somebody ends up being prosecuted : http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2014/04/09/squarcini-condamne-a-8000-euros-d-amende-dans-l-affaire-des-fadettes-du-monde_4398203_3224.html http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2014/04/09/squarcini-c... https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_des_%C3%A9coutes_de_l%27%C3%89lys%C3%A9e https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_des_%C3%A9coutes_de_l%...
- mercurial 12y ago
  In some areas, yes. But I am under the impression that as long as they can say "Secret Défense", the DGSE people can do whatever they want.
  - motdiem 12y ago
    That is largely correct. One way to look at the french state is that it is more worried about maintaining order than serving justice. And historically, the population has largely supported this stance. (unfortunately imo)
  - wlesieutre 12y ago
    That doesn't sound appreciably different from the US's "state secrets" defense
    - mercurial 12y ago
      At least, there was an effort to implement some controls over intelligence agencies following the Church Committee. It is unfortunate that it turned out to be effective, but at least the intention was there. The French law only mentions a weak commission with "consultative" powers.
pjc50 12y ago
I wonder who remembers the French state terrorist bombing of the Rainbow Warrior (Greenpeace ship) in an Australian harbour, resulting in one death?

by rtpg 12y ago

mercurial 12y ago

Precisely. The US has rules which do not work, and France is a free-for-all (I suspect with an added emphasis on "economic intelligence").

linschn 12y ago

There are rules, and the fact that the French government break those all the time is no excuse when finally somebody ends up being prosecuted : http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2014/04/09/squarcini-condamne-a-8000-euros-d-amende-dans-l-affaire-des-fadettes-du-monde_4398203_3224.html http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/article/2014/04/09/squarcini-c... https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_des_%C3%A9coutes_de_l%27%C3%89lys%C3%A9e https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_des_%C3%A9coutes_de_l%...

mercurial 12y ago
In some areas, yes. But I am under the impression that as long as they can say "Secret Défense", the DGSE people can do whatever they want.
- motdiem 12y ago
  That is largely correct. One way to look at the french state is that it is more worried about maintaining order than serving justice. And historically, the population has largely supported this stance. (unfortunately imo)
- wlesieutre 12y ago
  That doesn't sound appreciably different from the US's "state secrets" defense
  - mercurial 12y ago
    At least, there was an effort to implement some controls over intelligence agencies following the Church Committee. It is unfortunate that it turned out to be effective, but at least the intention was there. The French law only mentions a weak commission with "consultative" powers.

pjc50 12y ago

I wonder who remembers the French state terrorist bombing of the Rainbow Warrior (Greenpeace ship) in an Australian harbour, resulting in one death?