The administrative court on Friday morning considers the appeal of a German expelled from France before the G7 Biarritz. His lawyer challenges a "trial of intent" at the microphone of Europe 1.

REACTION

The first inadmissibility was issued before the G7 Biarritz, which will take place from 24 to 26 August. A 38-year-old German national was expelled from France on Friday, after being arrested during a routine roadside check. Luc, 38, a seasonal employee in France, is suspected by the authorities of wanting to participate in the counter-G7 Hendaye, not far from Biarritz.

>> READ ALSO - G7 in Biarritz: how justice is preparing to welcome potential troublemakers

This German is forbidden to return to France until August 29, despite his employment. He lodged an appeal with the administrative court, which will be considered on Friday morning. His lawyer, Me Muriel Ruef, denounces an excessive measure at the microphone of Europe 1.

Heard on europe1:

There is, to our knowledge, no procedure against him in Germany

"He left without even taking three cases and was led manu militari at the border," says the lawyer. "The decree is very clear, it refers to two facts.On the one hand, this person would be suspected in Germany of violence at the G20 in Hamburg. [Or] there is, to our knowledge, no procedure to his The other fact: he had a simple identity check near Bure, in the company of opponents of the Cigeo project. "

"

Heard on europe1:

I do not see how this person's behavior constitutes a danger

"

"A judge is asked to verify the legality and proportionality of this measure", explains the lawyer to justify the appeal before the administrative court. "Once again we have a law that has been sold to us as a law against terrorism that is used against someone who is only a political opponent, and I do not see how that person's behavior is a danger. . "

For Mr. Muriel Ruef, "we come to the lawsuits of intention: it is thought that he eventually has, according to his behavior, intentions to go to a place where it can be potentially dangerous." And to conclude: "We fall into state paranoia and we come to take measures that are very detrimental to individual freedoms, absolutely not justified in fact." The answer of the administrative court will be known during the day.