Recours au Conseil d État et au Conseil constitutionnel

Paris, 3 August 2015 — Since January 2015, La Quadrature du Net, FDN and the FDN Federation have begun a series of legal actions before the French Council of State and the French Constitutional Council against the laws and the implementing decrees that these associations consider fatal to civil liberties. In order to help people to follow over time the different stages of these procedures, this page explains in a few lines each of these appeals and their progress.

1. Non published implementation decrees on the activities of the Directorate-General for External Security (DGSE)

Two parallel procedures have been initiated against this decree unravelled by an article in the French magazine L'Obs in July 2015. This unpublished decree that stayed secret, authorises the massive tapping by the French foreign intelligence services of Internet communications going to or coming from French territory.

1.1. Suspensive judgement

Status: rejected

This emergency procedure aims at asking the immediate suspension of the decree waiting for the judgement as a matter of law. Read the brief.

This brief was rejected in an ruling issued on 9th September 2015 (fr) signed by Bernard Stirn, president of the litigation division of the French Council of State before having hold a contradictory hearing. In this very political decision, the judge does not consider the emergency of the plea.

1.2. action for annulment before the French Council of State

Status: in progress

The legal challenge focuses on two main points:

• External legality: the decree have no juridiction and was adopted in a irregular procedure;
• Internal legality: the decree has no legal basis. The surveillance law adopted in July 2015 should have given it a legal basis but the dispositions on international surveillance have been censored by the French Constitutional Council.

Read the judgement as a matter of law.

1.3 Les recours initiés par d'autres organismes

• Un avocat franco-américain saisit la CNCIS
• La French American Bar Association saisit la CNIL

2. Decree on the retention of communication data allowing to identify any person having contributed to the creation of online content

Status: in progress

Following the decision of the EUCJ of April 2014 "Digital Rights" condemning the massive retention of personal data, LQDN, FDN and FFDN have submitted to the French government a request to repeal the decree n°2011-219 of 25 February 2011 and the article R. 10-13 of the Postal and Electronic Communications Code. Those dispositions define the data to be retained by the Internet Service Providers, in order to allow the identification of the people having contributed to the creation of online content and authorises the operators of electronic communication to retain for a year the erasure of some technical data of their clients. The absence of answer from the government during two months is considered as an implicit refusal to repeal those dispositions, which is leading the three associations to refer directly to the French Council of State. The legal challenges focus on the unconventionality of the general and undifferentiated retention of "technical data" and more especially:

• The massive intrusion of fundamental rights, more especially the right to privacy;
• The impossible limitation to the bare necessities of massive data retention;

Read the brief (fr).

3. Parliamentary referral and the "narrow door" procedure on the surveillance law

Status: completed

The surveillance law authorizes bulk collection of data, a very broad field of application, bypassing the judicial judge, and very weak oversight by the National Commission for Oversight of Surveillance Techniques (CNCTR), even non-existent for international surveillance. The French Constitutional Council has been forced to rule on a great number of questions through parliamentary and presidential referrals :

• Referral by the President of France
• Referral by more than 60 deputies (106 deputies signed the referral)
• Referral by the President of the French Senate

Some organizations have sent their own observations using the "narrow door" procedure. Here are several amicus briefs we have been able to identify:

• LQDN, FDN and FFDN
• Amnesty, Cecil, Creis-Terminal, LDH, SAF, SM
• Attorney Marc-Antoine Ledieu
• Conseil national du Numérique (National Digital Council)
• Génération libre ("Free Generation")
• AFDEL, Renaissance Numérique ("Digital Renaissance"), Syntec Numérique, ASIC
• French American Bar Association
• Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE)

Suite à l'adoption de la loi sur le renseignement, un certain nombre de recours ont été initiés :

• Le bâtonnier de Paris saisit la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme
• L'association de la presse judiciaire saisit la Cour européenne des droits de l'Homme

3.2 Décret sur la désignation des services spécialisés de renseignement

Décret 2015-1185 du 28 septembre 2015 portant désignation des services spécialisés de renseignement

Statut : en cours

La loi du 24 juillet 2015 sur le renseignement autorise les services de renseignement a recourir à des techniques de surveillance très intrusives, sur la seule autorisation du Premier ministre et simple avis de la Commission nationale de contrôle des techniques de renseignement (CNCTR). Or un décret désigne les services, autres que les services de renseignement, dont les agents peuvent recourir aux services de renseignement. Ce décret est attaqué :

• Légalité externe
  • La version définitive et publiée du texte ne correspond pas à la version soumise pour avis au Conseil d'État
• Légalité interne
  • Le décret est dépourvu de base légale : Il ne répond pas aux exigences de justification et de proportionnalité, au regarde de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne et de la Convention européenne de sauvegarde des droits de l'homme et des libertés fondamentales.

La liste des services autres que les services de renseignement ayant accès aux techniques de renseignement est recensée sur cette page.

3.3 Décret sur l'organisation de la CNCTR

Décret 2015-1186 du 29 septembre 2015 relatif à l'organisation administrative et financière de la Commission nationale de contrôle des techniques de renseignement (CNCTR).

Statut : en cours

Les techniques de renseignement doivent être mises en œuvre par les services de renseignement sur autorisation du Premier ministre, après simple avis de la CNCTR. En cas d'urgence absolu, cet avis n'est plus requis. Le décret relatif à l'organisation de la CNCTR est attaqué sur les point suivant :

• Légalité externe
  • La version définitive et publiée du texte ne correspond pas à la version soumise pour avis au Conseil d'État
• Légalité interne
  • Le décret est dépourvu de base légale : Il a été pris sur le fondement de dispositions de la loi sur le renseignement qui ne répondent pas aux exigences de justification et de proportionnalité, au regarde de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne, de la directive 2002/58/CE du 12 juillet 2008 concernant le traitement des données à caractère personnel, et de la Convention européenne de sauvegarde des droits de l'homme et des libertés fondamentales.

3.4 Décret sur le contentieux et les fichiers intéressant la sûreté de l'État

Décret 2015-1211 du 1er octobre 2015 relatif au contentieux de la mise en œuvre des techniques de renseignement soumises à autorisation et des fichiers intéressant la sûreté de l'État.

Statut : en cours

Le décret fixe la procédure contentieuse concernant la mise en œuvre des techniques de renseignement et l'accès aux fichiers intéressant la sûreté de l'État. Il fixe notamment les modalités et délais de recours devant le Conseil d'État par toute personne souhaitant vérifier qu'aucune technique de renseignement n'est irrégulièrement mise en œuvre à son égard. Il est attaqué sur les fondements suivants :

• Légalité externe
  • La version définitive et publiée du texte ne correspond pas à la version soumise pour avis au Conseil d'État
• Légalité interne
  • Le décret est dépourvu de base légale : Il a été pris sur le fondement de dispositions de la loi sur le renseignement qui ne répondent pas aux exigences de justification et de proportionnalité, au regarde de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne, de la directive 2002/58/CE du 12 juillet 2008 concernant le traitement des données à caractère personnel, et de la Convention européenne de sauvegarde des droits de l'homme et des libertés fondamentales.

4. Implementation decree for the Terrorism Law on dereferencing sites

Décret d'application de la Loi terrorisme sur le déréférencement des sites

Status: in progress

The implementing decree on the Terrorism Law has been published on 4 march 2015. It allows the dereferencing of websites provoking to terrorist acts or supporting them and websites publishing pedopornographic images. LQDN, FDN and FFDN submitted an appeal for annulment to the State Council at the end of April 2015. The particular points attacked are:

• External legality
  • damage to freedom of communication not foreseen by the law
  • the lack of an impact study prior to the decree

• Internal legality
  • the decree violates the balance of powers
  • the decree is neither clear nor intelligible
  • there are alternative and more proportionate measures to dereferencing
  • the lack of legal oversight violates fundamental rights
  • the law and the decree combined do not contain sufficient guaranties to avoid abuses
  • the a posteriori legal remedies are ineffective
  • supervision of the measures by a qualified staff of the CNIL is ineffective

This essay has not been published yet

5. Decree implementing article 20 of the French Military Programming Act

Décret d'application de la LOPPSI et de la Loi terrorisme sur le blocage administratif de sites Internet

Two procedures have been implemented against this decree.

5.1. Action before the French Council of State

Status: in progress

The implementation decree of the LOPPSI and the Terrorism Law allow the administrative blockade of website was published on the 5th February 2015. LQDN, FDN, and FFDN have filed an annulment appeal before the French Council of State in April 2015. This appeal focuses on:

• External legality
  • infringement of freedom of communication not provided by law
  • infringement of secrecy of correspondences not provided by law
  • the absence of impact study
  • the absence of decree allowing the process of personal data by the administration

• Internal legality
  • the decree is infringing the balance of powers
  • the decree is nor clear nor intelligible
  • the website blockade is an disproportionate infringement of freedom of speech
  • the absence of jurisdictional control is infringing fundamental rights
  • the interception of communications towards blocked websites is unlawful

See the explanations:

• on the website of FDN (fr)
• on the website of LQDN

Read the appeal (fr) filed and the amicus brief (fr) filed by Article 19.

5.2. Demande de communication de la liste des adresses électroniques visée dans le décret n°2015-125 du 5 février 2015

Status: in progress

This is a procedure initiated only by La Quadrature du Net. The list of websites blocked by the decree n°2015-125 of 5th February 2015 is not published. La Quadrature du Net has thus sent on 27th August 2015 à letter to the Central Office Fighting against Criminality related to Technologies of Information and Communication (OCLCTIC) in order to request the publication of the addresses that have been administratively blocked. Read the - Lettre demande OCLCTIC.pdf letter (fr).

6. Decree implementing article 20 of the French Military Programming Act

Décret d'application de l'article 20 de la Loi de Programmation Militaire

Article 20 of the Military Programming Act (promulgated 13 December 2013) provides for a right to communication broadened to permit administrative bodies (especially the Ministry of Defence, but also the Ministry of the Interior or the Ministry of Finances) to have open access to "information" or "documents" held by hosters passing through telecoms operators or Internet service providers (ISP). The finalities necessary for this communication to be possible, are broad and often imprecise ("national security", "prevention of terrorism", "preserving essential elements of France's economic and scientific potential", etc.).

Two procedures have been initiated against this decree.

6.1. Action before the Council of State

Status: in progress

The implementing decree, published on 26 December 2014, is attacked by LQDN, FDN and FFDN before the French Council of State for the following reasons:

• External legality
  • The decree does not specify the correct article of the law. The decree must specify an article of law which does not foresee an implementation decree. Therefore it hasn't the competence to do so.
  • It has not been presented to the European Commission.
  • It has not been the subject of an impact study.

• Internal legality
  • The decree contradicts the decision of the European Union Court of Justice of April 2014 on data retention
  • according to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), an intrusion into private life may be enacted only by a law, and not by a decree
  • The decree broadens the scope of the law by allowing to collect data on people not posting any content on the Internet.
  • The decree allows for a far too great collection, which breaches the need to remain "necessary and proportionate"
  • The decree provides no oversight procedure

For explanations see:

• LQDN website
• FDN blog

And read the essay presented.

6.2. Priority Preliminary rulings on the issue of constitutionality (QPC)

Status: completed

On 15 April the three associations submitted to the French Council of State an application for a preliminary ruling on the constitutionality of the same implementing decree. This application raises several points:

• damages to privacy and especially to professional secrecy such as communications between an attorney and a client.
• damages to freedom of expression and especially the secrecy of sources of journalists
• the vagueness of the definition of "informations and documents"
• the vagueness of the definition of "request for production of network information"

See the explanations on FDN blog.

On 5 June, the French State Council decided to forward this application for a preliminary ruling to the French Constitutional Council, judging that the questions raised are indeed "new" and serious. See the LQDN website.

The French Constitutional Council had three months to review this question and declare whether the implementing decree is or not conform to the French Constitution. It published its decision on 24 July 2015, rejecting the entirety of the application for a ruling.

See LQDN's reaction.

Read the QPC and the complementary essay

on LQDN website