Summary

I can’t count how many times I’ve been stopped. I talk with people who say they’ve never been stopped in their lives, and I say to myself but how can that be?

—Dedé, of North African descent, St. Priest (outside Lyon), July 24, 2011

Most people in France have been stopped and asked by police for proof of their identity—or “contrôle d’identité”—at some point in their lives.

Anyone can theoretically be asked for proof of identity, and a straightforward stop should usually last only a few minutes and involve little more than providing one’s identity card or other proof of identity upon demand by a police officer.

However, research conducted in and around Paris, Lyon, and Lille in 2011 indicates that the identity check system is open to abuse by the French police, who use the system as a central tool in their operations and have broad powers to stop and check individuals regardless of whether they suspect criminal activity. These abuses include repeated checks—“countless” in the words of most interviewees—sometimes involving physical and verbal abuse. Stops can involve lengthy questioning, orders to empty pockets, bag searches, and intrusive pat-downs—including of children as young as 14-years-old, who described having to put their hands against a wall or car to be patted down.

Moreover, statistical and anecdotal evidence indicates that young blacks and Arabs living in economically disadvantaged areas are particularly frequent targets for such stops, suggesting that police engage in ethnic profiling(i.e. making assumptions who is more likely to be a delinquent based on appearance, including race and ethnicity, rather than behavior) to determine who to stop. Many of the youths interviewed by Human Rights Watch for this report said they viewed identity checks to be the sharp edge of their broader experience of discrimination and exclusion in French society.

Such practices are justified by French authorities as security measures and have been court-sanctioned, and there may be some cases, as police officials argue, where there is good reason for police to intervene—such as unruly behavior that prompts calls from neighbors or illegal activity such as smoking marijuana. Moreover, police profiling can be a legitimate preventive and investigative tool, including when suspect descriptions including ethnicity or national origin are based on specific, reliable information. Human Rights Watch recognizes that police officers often face dangerous and threatening situations and must restrain violent individuals to protect themselves and others.

In France, however, there are serious concerns about the way in which identity checks are conducted. There is no written legal basis exists for pat-downs during identity checks. Law enforcement officials too often ignore national and international guidelines that emphasize the importance of respectful treatment. The use of ethnic profiling is discriminatory and contravenes both national and international law when police systematically target certain groups for stops, even when these actions are grounded in unconscious stereotyping rather than intentional policy.

The threat of criminal sanction adds a coercive dimension to identity checks, with failure to cooperate during an identity check potentially leading to administrative or criminal charges, ranging from the minor offense of “refusal to cooperate” to the more serious charges of “insulting an officer” (outrage) and “assaulting an officer” (rebellion).

Excessive use of force, and repeated, insulting, and sometimes violent identity checks are not only unlawful, but also counterproductive—creating and accentuating divides between youth and police. Pent-up anger over police abuses, including (though not limited to) heavy-handed identity checks, played a role in major riots in 2005 in cities across France and appears to underlie countless lower-intensity conflicts between police and young people in urban areas. Such divisiveness and resentment may also negatively affect broader community-police relations and police efficacy, especially if people are reluctant to seek or provide help to the police.

Complicating the issue is lack of adequate documentation of police identification checks. Interviewees said they rarely ask the legal basis for why they are being checked, either because they do not want to appear uncooperative, or from experience believe it is pointless. Police are not obligated to offer individuals any explanation for their actions, or provide a written record of their actions. Nor do French authorities record or publish data on the use of identity checks by police, or track the ethnicity of those stopped.

Without documentation explaining the legal basis for the identity check, there is no way to verify its lawfulness, or provide proof that it involved abuse of power or ill-treatment.

Inconsistent and non-transparent internal recording of identity checks, and lack of information on the ethnic breakdown of identity checks also make it difficult to assess the effectiveness of these operations, verify the lawfulness of a stop, or conduct meaningful official analysis of the impact of police identity checks on minorities—and in particular whether particular groups being affected in a disparate or disproportionate way. As a result, it is extremely difficult to tackle discrimination in policing in France.

The French Code of Criminal Procedure gives law enforcement officers too much discretion to conduct identity checks, leaving ample room for arbitrariness and abuse. Accountability mechanisms, both within law enforcement agencies and through external oversight bodies, do not appear adequate.

Human Rights Watch calls on the French government to acknowledge the problems with identity check powers, and adopt the legal and policy reforms necessary to prevent ethnic profiling and abusive treatment during stops. Failure to do so will allow abuses to go unchecked, and relations between the police and minority youth to deteriorate further.