AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): While the French government claims that the bill to counter Islamic influence is designed to protect republican values and combat what it calls "political Islam," the law has quickly become one of the most controversial political topics in France.
According to a report by Al Jazeera, as French media have reported, the paradox is that this bill, proposed by French senator and former interior minister Bruno Retailleau, has simultaneously faced sharp criticism from the conservative right and left-wing parties in France, although the motivations and reasoning of each side differ.
Political Islam as an Organized Threat
This bill is based on the premise that the Muslim Brotherhood has, over recent decades, sought to reshape French society through infiltration of schools, associations, sports facilities, and religious institutions, aiming to replace the principles of the French Republic with religious standards.
In the explanatory text of the law, political Islam is described as a permanent, organized ideological threat that is not necessarily reliant on violence but rather seeks to undermine national cohesion through covert and systematic influence.
The bill provides for a series of stringent measures, including the creation of a new offense for any attempt to replace the laws of the French Republic with religious or communitarian standards, increasing the French government's powers to dissolve associations, and the ability to seize assets and financial resources of institutions suspected of separatist tendencies.
Right-Wing Concerns About the Expansion of Government Power
Despite the law's security-oriented approach, even some conservative legal circles close to the French right have warned against it.
In a collective article published in Le Figaro, a group of French lawyers, judges, and legal activists declared that the current version of the law poses a serious risk to public freedoms.
Much of the criticism is directed at Article 6 of the law, a clause that allows the government to seize the assets of individuals or associations even without a court order.
This spectrum, which could be called institutional right, believes the main problem is not solely the fight against political Islam, but the expansion of government powers in a way that might later be used against any kind of political or intellectual opponent.
Critics have asked whether granting such broad and vague powers to the government is compatible with the principles of the rule of law to which the French government claims to adhere.
They have warned that this law could become a form of modern repression, enabling the economic execution of any dissenting movement, from associations to media outlets and political figures.
In the view of this group, democracy is not preserved through economic and administrative punishments; rather, the way to protect it is through freedom of expression and the free competition of ideas.
Among the signatories of this statement are former French minister Noël Lenoir, former Paris Bar president Dominique de La Garanderie, former president of the Paris Court of Appeal Jean-Claude Magend, and renowned lawyer Gilles-William Goldnadel.
Left-Wing Criticism: A Law Against Muslims?
On the other side, left-wing parties and media outlets such as Mediapart have attacked this law from a different angle.
From the left's perspective, this bill is based on portraying Muslims as an internal enemy, using controversial reports and studies to justify intensified security and restrictive policies.
In a critical report, Mediapart stated that the government report cited by this law on the Muslim Brotherhood is, in fact, an incoherent compilation of old research that was used politically before its official publication.
The media outlet also noted that the government report itself acknowledges that there is no new evidence of French Muslims attempting to establish an Islamic state or implement Sharia law in the country.
Doubts About the Concept of "Islamic Influence"
Left-wing critics have also questioned the validity of some statistical studies used in drafting the law.
For example, regarding a study by the Ifop polling institute, it has been said that the questions were designed to steer responses toward a predetermined outcome, and that concepts such as Salafism or the Muslim Brotherhood lack precise and clear definitions.
Some sociologists have described this issue as the use of vague and elastic concepts.
Even French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez has acknowledged that the concept of "Islamic influence" is complex and difficult to define precisely.
The left warns that this law may, in practice, target not just extremist groups but Muslims in general and religious associations.
In this context, French Senator Ahmed Lawej has said that there has been enough political competition and performative laws.
Also, Guillaume Gontard, head of the Environmentalist group in the Senate, called this law a reflection of a racist ideology that presents Muslims as people secretly infiltrating to destroy society.
Another French senator, Mélanie Vogel, has warned that this law could even affect local associations serving halal food or Muslims ordinarily practicing their religious rituals.
She also asked why similar laws are not proposed regarding what might be called "Christian influence" in the public sphere.
A Deeper Crisis in French Society
Thus, the "Countering Islamic Influence" law is now caught between two different types of criticism: on one hand, right-wingers concerned about the expansion of government power and the restriction of civil liberties, and on the other, left-wingers who see it as a tool to spread Islamophobia and pressure Muslims.
Ultimately, this law, more than just a security matter, is a sign of a deeper crisis in France—a crisis about how to balance the protection of republican values with the preservation of civil liberties in a society that becomes more politically and socially polarized each year.
**************
End/ 345E
