November 13 trial: the victim compensation mechanism in question
Audio 04:30
The facade of the Bataclan concert hall, November 13, 2020. REUTERS - BENOIT TESSIER
Text by: Laura Martel
5 mins
At the trial of the November 13 attacks, it is the fifth and last week dedicated to hearings of survivors and relatives of victims.
More than 350 civil parties have testified to the horror of the attacks and their terrible consequences.
When discussing their difficult road to reconstruction, many of them criticized the compensation process of the Victims Guarantee Fund.
Advertising
Read more
Almost not a day goes by without mentioning difficulties with the Guarantee Fund.
If it is impossible to list each particular case here, the main criticisms were formulated from the first day of testimonies by the daughter of Manuel Dias, killed by a suicide bomber near the Stade de France.
She denounced "
an obstacle course that will destroy us every day
", before listing the "
heavy procedures
", the trauma "
revived with each expertise
", experts "
without empathy
"who"
minimize the prejudices
”and civil parties who feel in the position of accused, since“ it is
necessary to justify their status as victim continuously
.
"
Read also:
Trial of November 13, 2015: when the victims address the accused
Expertise difficult to live with
Several victims also accuse the Fund of behaving like an insurer.
In some areas, expertise can be particularly difficult, especially with regard to psychological sequelae but also with regard to the professional situation, indicates Philippe Duperron, president of the association "13onze15".
►
To read also:
Trial of November 13: the story of the last hostages of the Bataclan
“
The problem with expertise is that the expert must determine a state which must lead to compensation.
It is necessary to establish the relation of cause and effect between the attack and the professional situation in which the victim is after the attack.
We have seen experts who tend either to minimize the damage or to question the causal link between the two.
And obviously it's always extremely violent to hear this questioning,
”he explains.
Pain added to pain
“
All this adds pain to the pain,
” laments Philippe Duperron.
As is also the case with regard to the difficulties of certain relatives of victims to be taken care of, but also the impression of a lack of transparency in the compensation criteria, even if the Fund says it keeps them public. .
Philippe Duperron thus tells that when he refused a sum related to the death of his son, another, superior, was proposed to him, without any explanation.
Hence the terrible impression of a "
kind of poker
", when it is already so difficult for victims to see an amount put on their loss.
►
To read also:
Trial of November 13, week 7: overcoming the “survivor's guilt” to tell
"
But we must recognize that whatever it does, the Fund will never be able to live up to the suffering felt
", points out Philippe Duperron.
However, he would like to point out that this compensation system, despite its imperfections, plays a very important role.
Other countries, including European ones, envy us moreover, as also underlines Julien Rencki, the general director of the guarantee fund.
A public service with no economic objective
Julien Rencki also strongly refutes the comparison with an insurer.
The Guarantee Fund is a public service, controlled in particular by the Court of Auditors, which has no budget or budget limit, he insists.
It therefore has "
no economic objective
", only that of "
fair compensation."
"
Regarding the attacks of November 13, the Fund identified 2,600 victims.
82% have received a final offer of compensation: 70% of them have accepted it, 6% of victims contest it in court.
Between final sums and provisions already paid, nearly 145 million euros have been granted to date.
16 false victims were also found.
►
To read also:
"Remember", the brain of the survivors of November 13th auscultated by science
Julien Rencki says he is however perfectly aware of the feelings of the victims.
But it actually stems, according to him, from the choice made by France to offer “
total compensation
” (which takes care of the physical and psychological consequences but also the economic situation), individualized and not fixed as it may be the case in other countries.
“
The difficulty,” he
emphasizes, “
is that for the Guarantee Fund to be able to compensate as closely as possible the after-effects and trauma, that supposes that it knows them.
Hence the need to establish these prejudices.
Hence the need for medical expertise.
And I know how sensitive it is and sometimes very badly experienced by the victims who, faced with a doctor who is not there to treat them - he is an expert doctor - but who is there to assess the after-effects, may feel they have to justify their suffering somewhere.
"
Work to improve the system
The Guarantee Fund and associations are unanimous: there is room to improve the system.
They are working on it together.
A medical expertise charter has been adopted, the emphasis is on training experts and a consultation on the compensation process was launched this summer with 5,500 victims of attacks perpetrated since 2015 in particular.
►
To read also:
Trial of November 13: cathartic testimonies and tribute to the victims
But it will no doubt also be necessary to address more complex issues, both underline Philippe Duperron and Julien Rencki, such as a possible flat-rate in certain areas or the intervention of the judge earlier in the process, even without litigation.
The objective being to ensure that this device, crucial support for reconstruction, does not, paradoxically, become an obstacle to this reconstruction.
Newsletter
Receive all international news directly in your mailbox
I subscribe
Follow all the international news by downloading the RFI application
google-play-badge_FR
Trial of the November 13 attacks