The government dissolved the GUD student union and three other far-right groups

The small Lyon group Les Remparts is also targeted by the decree, as are a bar and a gym where identity activists meet.

Published


Update


Reading time: 1 min

Members of the Union Defense Group (Gud) march against globalization in Paris, May 8, 2011. (THOMAS SAMSON / AFP)

The GUD (Union Defense Group) and three other far-right structures based in Lyon were dissolved by the Council of Ministers, announced government spokesperson Prisca Thévenot on Wednesday June 26, a few days before the first round of elections. legislative. Apart from the GUD, an ultra-right student union created in the 1970s and recently reactivated, the small group Les Remparts as well as La Traboule and Top Sport Rhône, two associations managing the bar and the sports hall where its members meet in Old Lyon, were also dissolved. An Islamist association, Jonas Paris, was also dissolved.

“Hate of the extremes must be fought by the Republic”defended the Minister of the Interior, Gérald Darmanin. A week earlier, he had announced that he was preparing to propose the dissolution of the GUD, described as “very friendly ultra-right group” with “the leaders of the National Rally”. “These are people who think there is white supremacy, who make extremely serious anti-Semitic remarks”he explained, specifying that he had been working on this issue since “nine months”.

After the announcement of its dissolution, the GUD Paris denounced a “crazy policy of repression of the national camp” by Gérald Darmanin. “We will continue the nationalist and revolutionary struggle”, affirmed the union. The procedure for dissolving the small group Les Remparts was launched at the beginning of May, in particular in response to repeated requests from the mayor of Lyon, the ecologist Grégory Doucet.

“At a time when the RN is preparing to govern, there is an urgent need to stem this violence.”

Grégory Doucet, mayor of Lyon

quoted by AFP

The identity group immediately made it known that it intended “contest this decision before the Council of State” and not “let yourself be faced with this arbitrary decision”.


source site-33