It is she who wields this delicate Trebuchet

The unlikely treatment which was victim of "Release" former boss assuming the facts established but no one seems to challenge the reality left speechless and humiliated.

Time is more where the press was exposed to brutal decisions put its demonstrations for independence, to the penalties that were threatening its existence. It enjoys a status reasonably protective, always subject to improvements of course, but nevertheless satisfactory. Except that itself is forgotten in defamation or excessive violations of privacy, legislation at best ensures the balance between freedom of newspapers and the rights of persons to which it could violate. The judicial authority is guarantor. It is she who wields this delicate Trebuchet. Most often, it is enough notice to do so in a satisfactory manner.

It is a decisive condition for this: Judge consciousness of the specificity of the press, in a free society, including when itself is poor use, principles and values that exceed by far.

That is why, in democratic countries, and even in the absence of specific requirements, justice prohibits any privative or restrictive of freedom to the press. Place a journalist in custody, search a press company is not trivial. This is, on the contrary, of exceptionally serious measures, which may be envisaged in situations themselves exceptional.

This does not mean that the press would be above the law, but only that it has designed for her a special legislation, including illustrate the venerable Act of 29 July 1881, but the specific provisions of the code of criminal procedure (article 56-2 and 109). The recent revision of the Constitution, moreover, has seen fit to complete its section 34 to explicitly appear "freedom, pluralism and the independence of the media."

Democratic illiteracy

Is such evidence, yet basic, some magistrates, fortunately isolated, seem to have lost consciousness. Remember, in the framework of an action for aiding and abetting breach of secrecy of the trial, those who found natural to launch a search at the premises of "chained duck", in the footsteps of their colleagues, a few months earlier, had already visited the offices of the "Point" to try to identify the author of a leak.

Today, the case of "Liberation" is a new and overwhelming illustration of a form of democratic illiteracy. And as if this incompetence did us not quite ashamed, it took, for good measure, add, with the police, these already shocking in another age and unsustainable practices in ours.

The narrow legalism is distressing in themselves are locked Ministers to try to justify the unjustifiable. A hand, all the judges, all days, know that a simple call to the lawyer is sufficient to bring the summoned failed, without the need of no warrant. On the other hand, it is for having neglected the specificity of the press that the France was already several times condemned, and recently by the European Court of human rights (June 7, 2007 on "receiving stolen goods in violation of the secrecy of the trial")

The worst, in all this, is that the freedom of the press is even not the target. If it were to interfere, or intimidate, if it were a devious conspiracy in some obscure law firm, it would be a fight that the Democrats would win without real difficulties. But it is not this that is at issue, simply bad habits spread, acclimatize, to normalize, which is fortunately speak here because it's journalists, but which, in other cases, spread without noise.

The remedy is probably not in legislation more that oscillate between chat and pointless complexity. More simply, it is recalled that the lightness, when it comes from a judicial authority may be obscene. And if the new means given to the Higher Council of the judiciary by the revision of 2008 may contribute, the grantor will be decidedly useful work.