While the Court of Cassation has confirmed the criminal irresponsibility of the murderer of Sarah Halimi, several voices are raised, including that of the President of the Republic, to make alterations in discernment related to the taking of narcotics an exception to the absence of responsibility.

ANALYSIS

Emmanuel Macron is considering changing the law. While the Court of Cassation has validated the criminal irresponsibility of the murderer of Sarah Halimi, the head of state reacted to this case on Sunday, in an interview with

Le Figaro

. "Deciding to take narcotics and then become 'like crazy' should not in my eyes remove your criminal responsibility," said Emmanuel Macron. If a delusional puff is likely to abolish the criminal responsibility of the accused, whatever the origin of his dementia, was it related to the taking of narcotics, in some cases the consumption of alcohol or drugs is well and well considered as an aggravating circumstance. An ambiguity that some elected officials also want to put an end to. 

>>

Find Europe midi in replay and podcast here 

What the law says

Currently the law indicates that a person who committed an act under the influence of a delusional puff having abolished his discernment cannot be judged.

This person is declared criminally irresponsible, including when his mental state could have been caused by the consumption of drugs.

The law does not provide for a distinction according to the origin of the mental disorder.

The Court of Cassation therefore only applied the existing texts, in this case article 122-1 of the Penal Code, explaining that "the judge cannot distinguish where the legislator has chosen not to distinguish ".

An amendment to make drug use an exception to criminal irresponsibility

Some elected officials now wish to qualify this point.

Éric Pauget, deputy Les Républicains des Alpes-Maritimes, thus proposes to modify the law, by simply adding an exception, precisely that of the taking of narcotics.

Clearly, the abolition of discernment cannot be retained if the disorder results from the taking of narcotics.

This initiative also echoes certain questions raised by the way in which the law deals with the taking of narcotics, according to the crime or misdemeanor committed.

For example, in the case of willful and unintentional violence, in particular traffic offenses, or in cases of rape, taking a narcotic is indeed considered an aggravating circumstance.