French Assembly Law Committee dismisses petition against police use-of-force presumption bill

Caption: A riot police officer points his rubber bullet launcher during a demonstration in Marseille, September 10, 2025. MIGUEL MEDINA/AFP

The National Assembly will not debate a petition against a bill establishing a presumption of lawful use of firearms by law enforcement, despite the petition having gathered over 720,000 signatures. Members of the Law Committee, meeting late into the night from Tuesday, July 21, to Wednesday, July 22, voted to dismiss the petition by 35 votes to 21.

Read the analysis | Article reserved for subscribers: Groups, associations, unions of magistrates and lawyers up in arms against the law on the presumption of self-defense for law enforcement

Key Provisions of the Bill

The bill states that when using their weapons, police officers and gendarmes "are presumed to have acted" within the framework of the law. This presumption is "rebuttable by any evidence to the contrary." The original text provided for a presumption of "self-defense" for law enforcement, but a ministerial amendment modified the wording to secure support from other groups in the government camp.

Supporters' and Detractors' Positions

• Supporters argue the text would prevent law enforcement members from being systematically suspected or placed in police custody.
• Detractors on the left denounce it as a "license to kill," claiming investigations into the lawfulness of police shootings will be affected or even prevented.
• The petition further argues that France already has "the highest number of people killed or injured by public force agents" in the European Union.

Committee's Rationale for Dismissal

In the Law Committee, a majority considered that a debate on the petition would clash with the ongoing examination of the bill itself. The bill, sponsored by Eric Pauget (Les Républicains), deputy for Alpes-Maritimes, was adopted in early July by the National Assembly and has now been transmitted to the Senate.

• Christophe Marion (Renaissance) argued that studying the petition would be "redundant" with "the examination of the bill it denounces, [which] is still ongoing."
• Anne Bergantz (MoDem) added that "giving effect to the petition would constitute a flagrant violation of bicameralism."

Precedent and Procedural Context

In April, deputies used similar arguments to dismiss another petition that had gathered over 700,000 signatures, opposing the Yadan bill on anti-Semitism, which was ultimately buried by the government.

According to the Assembly's rules, a debate in the chamber "may be" organized on a report concerning a petition signed by more than 500,000 people. However, a committee must first decide whether to dismiss or examine the petition before drafting such a report.

Ugo Bernalicis (La France Insoumise) argued: "The only condition is to have the 500,000 signatories, and they are there; we should just acknowledge the fact and move to the next step."

The only petition to have been debated in the chamber so far concerned the Duplomb law, which provided for the reintroduction of banned pesticides before being partially censored by the Constitutional Council.

"This right that has..."