• This week, the organizers of a wild party in Lyon were sentenced to the prison sentence and in Paris an investigation was opened after an impromptu party at the Buttes Chaumont.

    In both cases, the charge was “endangering others”.

  • For Avner Doukhan, lawyer at the Paris bar, this offense does not seem to be the most appropriate for this kind of offense.

  • So what are the real and potential risks of partying now?

This Monday, an investigation was also opened by the Paris prosecutor's office for "endangering the life of others", after an improvised party, in the park of Buttes Chaumont in Paris and in which several dozen people participated on Sunday without respecting barrier gestures.

So in times of coronavirus, whether organized, spontaneous, wild or private, can parties take you to prison?

What does “endangering the life of another” legally mean?

"It is an extremely technical offense and so particular that in many cases it cannot be applied", underlines Avner Doukhan, criminal lawyer at the Paris bar.

As specified in article 223-1 of the Penal Code, endangering others presupposes the meeting of three conditions in order to be constituted.

The first is the existence of a particular obligation of safety and prudence imposed by law or regulation.

“That is to say that there must be a law or a decree that says that the act is prohibited and that therefore by doing it, we violate a rule.

This prohibition must be very precise, ”explains the criminal lawyer.

Then obviously it is the fact of directly exposing others to an immediate risk of death or injury.

And finally, there must be a deliberate breach of the special duty of care.

Can partying be considered life threatening?

"This offense is difficult to apply in the context of the organization of private parties, such as public wild parties", concedes Avner Doukhan, who says he is even a little surprised that it has been retained by the court of Lyon. If condition number two is fulfilled since article 3 of the decree of March 25 prohibits meetings with more than six people on public roads or in establishments open to the public, the fact of directly exposing others to an immediate risk of death or injury is much less obvious.

"Within the framework of the law, there must be a certain causal link between the fact of organizing a party and the risk for the participants and that this risk be immediate," said the lawyer.

A complicated criterion to prove knowing that there is not yet precise and proven information on the period of contamination of the virus.

"It is also difficult to say that there is a real risk in the context of the festivals in Lyon and at the Buttes Chaumont where we have seen it, the participants were relatively young," continues Avner Doukhan.

However, the government is telling us today that people under 55 do not have priority for vaccinations because they are not populations said to be at risk.

On the question of endangerment, there are therefore double standards.

"

What about private parties?

For these 29 years, Marie organized a small jump in her Parisian apartment. Thirty-five people and loud speakers. “The police came at 11:30 pm the first time and two more times thereafter. The party ended at 7 am ”, indicates the young woman who did not open to the police. "My neighbors have filed a complaint for endangering others and sound assault." The police investigated, but ultimately dismissed the case because they felt the offense was not serious enough.

“It is extremely important to remember that today, unless I am mistaken, there is no clear and precise prohibition on meeting in a private place with more than six guests,” explains Avner Doukhan.

It is therefore necessary to distinguish between parties organized in a private sphere and those organized in a public place, or open to the public.

Thus, repressing through the prism of endangering others, the organizer of a party in a private place seems delicate to me. ” 

So why such harshness in the decisions pronounced?

"Criminal law is a very strict application law, but the final decisions are at the discretion of the judges", explains the lawyer in order to justify the conviction retained for the two Lyon brothers. Case by case with the key to a sanction that may depend on the size of the event, its type, whether it pays off or not, its more or less professional organization, but also the judicial personality of the organizer, namely his background and his criminal record.

It should also be remembered that meetings with more than 6 people on public roads or in establishments open to the public are punished by a fine of 135 euros for each of the participants. Same sanction if they do not wear a mask. And the fines are cumulative. However, the article does not apply to private parties. “It is rather the violation of the curfew that will be retained, with also a 135 euros fine for each of the participants. The problem is that for this to happen, the police must enter the home and observe the party. Except that they do not have the right to return, ”comments the lawyer at the Paris Bar.

While jail terms don't seem right now for the friends of the illegal party, the offense classifications seem tougher lately.

An observation on which Avner Doukhan invites us to remain vigilant: “Widening the scope of the offenses is the risk of deteriorating our freedoms.

The health crisis is already having a real impact on the rule of law.

"

Society

Coronavirus in Rouen: The police intervene during a clandestine party

Society

Coronavirus in Paris: 18 people fined during a clandestine party

  • Coronavirus

  • Covid 19

  • Society

  • Jail

  • Justice

  • Curfew

  • Rave

  • Conviction

  • Party