“I was caught in a judicial jihad” | EUROtoday

Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.

LFeminist and decolonialist activist Rokhaya Diallo, co-founder of the Les Indivisibles motion, prosecuted the author and thinker Pascal Bruckner this week. Tuesday May 21, in entrance of the 17e chamber of the Paris judicial court docket – devoted to press affairs –, the writer of Gall Moon needed to reply for the offense of “complicity in defamation”, for feedback made on October 21, 2020 on the set of the present 28 Minutes, on Arte, organized across the theme: “Is the white man essentially responsible? »

Evening replace

Every night from 6 p.m.

Receive the knowledge analyzed and deciphered by the Point editorial workers.

Your registration has been taken under consideration with the e-mail deal with:

To uncover all our different newsletters, go right here: MyAccount

By registering, you settle for the final situations of use and our confidentiality coverage.

Initially very well mannered, the exchanges turned bitter when Pascal Bruckner, evoking a platform hostile to Charlie Hebdo initiated by Les Indigènes de la République, accused Rokhaya Diallo – who had signed it – of getting “with other […] armed with the arm of the killers.”

On the evening of 1er on November 2, 2011, a molotov cocktail was thrown on the newspaper constructing. The column, broadcast just a few days after this arson, opposed the assist given to the staff of Charlie Hebdoprey, in keeping with its signatories, to “an Islamophobic obsession”, complicit with a “secular national state”, opposed particularly to the carrying of the Islamic headband in public locations.

READ ALSO Pascal Bruckner: “The victim has become a Christ figure” Four years later, on January 7, 2015, the Kouachi brothers entered the title's premises, armed with assault rifles, earlier than opening hearth and killing twelve members of the staff, together with eight journalists and cartoonists.

“Your status as a Muslim and black woman allows you to say a certain number of things, I am thinking of what you said on [ce journal] and which led to the death of the twelve Charlie Hebdo », Launched Pascal Bruckner to Rokhaya Diallo, on Arte. “Did what I said lead to someone’s death?” […] It’s scandalous, it’s completely disrespectful what you’re saying! », replied the one who, presenting herself as an “intersectional feminist and decolonialist”, usually denounces “state racism” in France.

Rokhaya Diallo filed a criticism following the present. Three and a half years after this incident, a trial was held, throughout which the allegedly defamatory feedback of Pascal Bruckner have been dissected and debated for greater than eight hours, defended by lawyer Richard Malka – touring companion of the primary hour and historic lawyer of Charlie Hebdo. Civil get together, the plaintiff was suggested by William Bourdon.

The prosecutor requested the acquittal, contemplating that the novelist and essayist had not crossed the boundaries of freedom of expression, in a debate of public curiosity. The court docket will ship its judgment on June 25.

In the interview he gave us, Pascal Bruckner persists and indicators: “Ms. Diallo, with others, has indirect responsibility. With this kind of platform, it should come as no surprise that the team of Charlie could have been swept away a few years later. »

Appearing in court is always an ordeal, a very distressing, nervously difficult and stressful moment.

Point : How did you experience the lawsuit that Rokhaya Diallo brought against you?

Pascal Bruckner: It's still very unpleasant. Appearing in court is always an ordeal, a very distressing, nervously difficult and stressful moment. Don't think I took things too lightly, even if I was happy to be able to explain and defend myself. I found the debates fascinating, very high-level, and I was blown away by the nobility of French justice, at least in this instance. But I continue to be surprised that the judges were able to be disturbed to decide a debate of this nature which, it seems to me, is a battle of opinion, and that alone.

This is not the first time that you have appeared before the 17e bedroom…

Indeed, Les Indigènes de la République and Les Indivisibles have already taken me to court, in 2016, for other comments that I had made on Arte, which makes me say that this channel does not really support me luck (laughs). I felt, after the terrible attack of January 7, 2015, that it was necessary to “put the collaborators of the assassins of Charlie » and accused the two associations which pursued me of “ideologically justifying the death of [ses] journalists.” I gained at first occasion and on attraction, however I bear in mind it as a horrible expertise.

This time, it was Madame Diallo alone who attacked me. I acknowledge his proper to guage my feedback scandalous. She might have opposed them with reasoning, arguments, and responded to them on the deserves as a substitute of adopting, as she did, the posture of a sufferer who’s defending her popularity. Listening to her, watching her, I had the impression of being pursued and judged for against the law of lèse-majesté.

Rokhaya Diallo believes that the petition she signed in 2011 fell inside her freedom of expression. Do you acknowledge his proper to criticize? Charlie Hebdo ?

But after all ! We have each proper to hate Charlie, to seek out his humor low, corny and in dangerous style. From there, to trampling on it and wishing for its disappearance, there’s a distinction… Could we are saying that this newspaper, which had simply been set on hearth, had actually appeared for it? I hoped, after the 2015 assault, that Ms. Diallo would inform us: “I'm sorry for what happened, I never wanted such a thing. » But those words never came. Guy Bedos did not spare Charlie. He said: “This newspaper pisses me off, let them die!” » But after they have been killed, he instructed the survivors that he by no means imagined or wished for such an atrocity, and that he was sorry. It's fairly easy, proper?

No one denies Rokhaya Diallo her freedom of expression. But I myself have the right to express myself.

Rokhaya Diallo denied at the hearing that he had committed “clumsiness”, leaving this formula to his lawyers, instead invoking his freedom of expression…

No one denies him his freedom of expression. But I myself have the right to express myself, to question the reasons for an attack which killed twelve people, precisely because they defended freedom of expression and, incidentally, secularism. The 2011 column, signed by Ms. Diallo, was very violent. She suggested that the fire to which the newspaper had suffered would allow it to replenish its coffers. The petition also attacked “secularists” and “Islamophobes” in a very virulent manner.

You described this new trial as “judicial jihad”…

Indeed, and I assume, even if, of course, it is better than a beheading or death threats. By jihad I mean harassing people who disagree with you. A trial is not nothing. It's long and expensive, not everyone can afford a lawyer. If certain words can be expensive, we may be tempted to say to ourselves that it is better to refrain from saying them and shut up. The procedure then turns into a gag order.

Do you still think that Rokhaya Diallo helped “arm the killers”?

What I see is that his words, his ideology, have not changed one iota. Under the guise of defending minorities, trans people, the wretched of the earth, Ms. Diallo remains an activist for political Islam who vomits, throughout articles and conferences, French secularism. Read his papers in the Washington Postin the Guardian: nothing finds favor in his eyes in France. She hates everything that our country represents, the values ​​it conveys!

I discovered during my trial that Ms. Diallo was a real star abroad. The magazine Slate ranked it at 36e rank of the most influential French female personalities; the distinctions awarded to him far exceed mine. She is therefore a powerful woman, not at all oppressed, who is in reality fighting a double fight. An ideological fight and the defense of one's own interests, one's image and one's status.

Words have that means, they’re relayed and their violence causes injury after they fall on fragile brains.

A number of hours earlier than the trial, she walked up the steps of the Cannes Film Festival, within the arms of Judith Godrèche. I used to be stunned that this honest feminist activist may very well be accompanied by a lady who defended Bin Laden and condemned the Arabs who stroll bareheaded on the street. It’s fairly unusual, however possibly Judith Godrèche was misinformed, I don’t know…

So you persist and signal…

Absolutely. Referring to the 2011 column, his lawyer steered that nobody had learn it, so it had no influence. I don’t agree. This sort of petition makes noise. Words have that means, they’re relayed and their violence causes injury after they fall on fragile brains, producing deleterious results.

Ms. Diallo, together with others, has oblique accountability. With this sort of name, it ought to come as no shock that the staff Charlie might have been swept away just a few years later. The virulence of the hatred of caricatures contributes to what Gilles Keppel referred to as “atmospheric jihadism”, which makes the gesture attainable. Some phrases can kill, we now have recognized this because the Second World War.

My phrases have been sturdy, I admit it and I take accountability for them. Ms. Diallo, who refused public debate, doesn’t like being reminded of her previous commitments; she has a picture to defend.

Are you accusing him of duplicity?

There are two Rokhaya Diallo: the feminist, left-wing and anti-racist activist, as she presents herself within the French media. And the one who, overseas, all through conferences and interviews, makes notorious remarks about France, this nation which oppresses Muslims and crushes freedom of conscience with its secularism. Her lawyer, William Bourdon, accused me of hating every little thing she represents, together with her shade. It's absurd. I dwell with a Rwandan girl, my son-in-law is an American Muslim of Indian origin. It's not Islam that I hate, it's fanaticism. It's not the identical factor in any respect.