The trial of Pierre Alain Mannoni, in Nice, on November 23, 2016, through and beyond Pierre Alain, is a trial brought against empathy, solidarity, and humanism.
In reality, if there are disobedient citizens in the Alpes-Maritimes, it is primarily because the State and the Departmental Council of the Alpes-Maritimes do not fulfill their legal obligations.
In December 2015, the Grasse Court of First Instance effectively reinstated the crime of solidarity, which had been abolished by the January 2014 law, by condemning Claire, 72 years old, for an act of humanity. The Nice Prosecutor’s Office is currently prosecuting Cédric Herrou and Pierre Alain Mannoni for the same reason.
I met Pierre Alain Mannoni at his trial in Nice on November 23, 2016. The Prosecutor of the Republic sought a six-month suspended sentence against him. But this trial, through and beyond Pierre Alain, is a trial against empathy, mutual aid, and humanism.
For if there are disobedient citizens in the Roya Valley, it is mainly because the State and the Departmental Council of the Alpes-Maritimes do not fulfill their legal obligations.
So who today places solidarity on the defendant’s bench? The State, the very one that does not assist those in danger and stigmatizes those who make up for its own neglect.
The unaccompanied minors not taken care of
An unaccompanied minor, that is, a child or adolescent without a parent or other legal representative, whether foreign or not, must be taken care of by public authorities under child protection. And they are entitled to the protection and assistance of France until they reach adulthood.
Thus, if residents of the Roya Valley, bordering Italy, must rescue unaccompanied minors they see wandering the mountain roads in winter, it is because the public authorities are not fulfilling their role.
I therefore appeal first to the new Prefect of the Alpes-Maritimes, Mr. Georges François Leclerc, for the State to fulfill its legal obligations and for the Alpes-Maritimes not to remain a lawless zone.
I appeal secondly to Eric Ciotti, president of the Departmental Council of the Alpes-Maritimes, to finally assume the legal obligations incumbent on his community and to open an additional reception center for unaccompanied minors, near the Italian border.
Regarding adults, while one may debate the legal aspects, the analysis of the political decision is unequivocal: the French government is creating a new Calais in Ventimiglia. And France is acting towards Italy as England acted towards it.
How many deaths were needed, of people trying to reach England and losing their lives, before the Calais Jungle was finally dismantled? How many deaths will it take in Ventimiglia and the Roya Valley?
A young 17-year-old refugee, Mjmelet Berhal, recently died, hit by a truck on the highway while trying to reach the French border. A migrant is also missing, presumably swept away by a flood of the Roya. How many more tragedies before the authorities decide to act?
I add that, fundamentally, nothing justifies preventing individuals from applying for asylum in the country of their choice, and closing the border only enriches traffickers and fuels human trafficking.
Let’s dare to say against the commonly accepted opinion: the free movement of individuals should be the rule and is the only viable solution. The Italian border must be reopened as a matter of urgency.
Where does the duty of rescue end?
Pierre Alain Mannoni rescued three young Eritreans, including one minor, who crossed part of the Sahara, Sudan, Libya, the Mediterranean, stayed for varying periods in camps in Italy, and then crossed the Italian-French border by mountain.
Faced with Pierre Alain, a sensible and deeply humane man, the Prosecutor of the Republic, Jean-Michel Prêtre, tried to dissociate the act of rescue, a noble act not prosecuted, from the aid in housing and assisting the movement of individuals in irregular situations. But the Prosecutor’s reasoning suffers from at least two major errors.
The first is the limit between rescue, housing, and movement: where does the duty of rescue end? Should one, after having fed and cared for a person in need of help, leave them on the side of a mountain road in winter without means? Hand them over to the authorities knowing they will be sent back to Italy and will try again to cross the border at the risk of their life? Is it not better to help them join the rest of their family in Germany or England where they will apply for asylum? Is rescuing someone really about considering only the short term without worrying about what will happen tomorrow to the rescued person? When rescuers help someone, they do not just provide emergency care; they ensure the person’s future and do not leave until the person is taken care of and secured.
The second error is saying that Pierre Alain Mannoni aided the movement of people in irregular situations. The three Eritreans he helped are only in irregular situations because France arbitrarily decided to close its border with Italy and consequently refuses to register their asylum applications. An asylum seeker is only in an irregular situation if their application is examined and rejected, and they remain despite the rejection. But these three people were not even allowed to apply for asylum in France.
Helping one’s neighbor, extending a hand, rescuing people in distress, this is what each of us should do. This is what public authorities should encourage us to do. And this is what Pierre Alain Mannoni is accused of, who, through his act of humanity, highlights the lack of humanity of our leaders.
In the Alpes-Maritimes, it is indeed the fault of the State and the Departmental Council that drives citizens to civil disobedience. But let them be warned, because we are all in solidarity with the citizens who are supportive of the Roya. And the gesture of Claire, Cédric, Pierre Alain, and many others, deep down, it is our honor to everyone, and it is the honor of France.
by David Nakache
