we explain to you the offense of “provocation to withholding care”, voted by the National Assembly

The article of the bill, which targets new types of charlatans in the health field, was adopted after heated debates. Opponents of the measure denounce a risk for public freedoms.

The rejection of the measure on the night of Tuesday February 13 caused an outcry in the Macronist ranks in the Assembly. After long debates, the deputies adopted at first reading the bill against sectarian aberrations on Wednesday February 14, in which they reinstated the controversial article 4, which creates a new offense of “provocation to abstaining from care” medical. Franceinfo explains what you need to know on the subject.

It aims to fight against “gurus 2.0”

The article in question aims to fight against “charlatans” and “2.0 gurus”, who promote on the internet methods presented as “miracle solutions” to cure serious illnesses such as cancer. Often without scientific training and with contempt for science, they can drift towards behavior of sectarian control.

Among these methods, raw foodism, a form of naturopathy which claims to cure cancer by eating raw vegetables, or even therapeutic or total fasting. Many of the promoters of such practices are being sued by families of patients who died after rejecting conventional treatments in favor of these methods.

The Secretary of State for Citizenship and the City, Sabrina Agresti-Roubache, underlined at the opening of the debates that the number of reports to the Interministerial Mission for Vigilance and the Fight against Sectarian Abuses (Miviludes) has doubled since 2010, in particular because of the Covid-19 epidemic and the use of social networks. By punishing this behavior, the offense of “provoking the abstention of care” would therefore serve to “fill a real gap in our arsenal by equipping ourselves with effective means of combating therapeutic abuses of a sectarian nature”defended the text’s rapporteur, Brigitte Liso, in the law committee.

Up to three years in prison for these “provocations”

As we can read in its first version on the website of the National Assembly, article 4 of chapter III, proposes to modify the Penal Code to punish “the provocation” on a sick person “abandon or refrain from following medical treatment”if this abandonment is presented as beneficial when it could lead to dangerous consequences.

There “provocation” to adopt practices presented as beneficial, even though they expose one to “an immediate risk of death or injury likely to result in mutilation or permanent disability” is also affected. These offenses would be punished by one year of imprisonment and a fine of 15,000 euros, or three years and a fine of 45,000 euros when this provocation “was followed by effects”.

The Council of State doubts the merits of the measure

Senators withdrew the first version of this article from the bill at first reading in December, highlighting its legal fragility. In an opinion delivered to the government in November, the Council of State considered that current law already made it possible to repress most of these practices, by condemning the illegal practice of medicine, deceptive commercial practices or the endangerment of the lives of others.

The court also considered that this offense, in its initial wording, risked constituting an infringement not “necessary, appropriate and proportionate” to freedom of expression, “freedom of scientific debate and [au] role of whistleblowersprotected by the Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

These arguments were taken up by many MPs who voted against the article. On the left, the rebellious Jean-François Coulomme denounced an offense “too vague” which could prevent “criticize pharmaceutical abuses”. Parliamentarians from the different benches of the hemicycle insisted on the role of doubt in the scientific debate and mentioned the whistleblower Irène Frachon, whose role was decisive in the Mediator affair, a drug against diabetes used as a cutting agent. -hunger and responsible for serious pathologies.

An article rejected, modified and… adopted

These criticisms initially got the better of article 4. A majority of deputies present in the hemicycle thus voted to delete this new offense, by 116 votes (RN, LFI, LR, a few communist votes) against 108 votes. (Renaissance, MoDem, socialists, some voices from Horizons and environmentalists). The rapporteur of the text, Brigitte Liso, denounced a vote “scandalous” and an “disappointment for the victims”.

To avoid the rejection of one of the key measures of the text, Renaissance deputy Sacha Houlié requested a new deliberation on Wednesday, in the name of the law committee of which he is president. A second vote which provoked indignation among opponents, with points of order and suspensions of the session.

Article 4 was amended before its review. The people targeted will be able to escape the new crimes if their incitements are accompanied by a “clear and complete information” about their possible consequences for health, and whether people agree to follow them in a manner “free and enlightened”. Those legally considered to be whistleblowers are also not concerned.

This new vote resulted in the adoption of article 4, by 182 votes to 137. The bill must still be adopted in identical terms by the Senate. He must return to the upper house, on a date currently unknown.