"It's a real collective victory and this decision will appeal to others"

In two weeks, French Internet users will no longer be able to access the Participatory Democracy website. The justice has made this Thursday its decision and ordered nine French operators, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), blocking this well-known address of the "fachosphere". According to Médiamétrie's figures, the site registered 147,000 unique visitors last September. Its contents, considered openly antisemitic, xenophobic, homophobic and racist, had been reported in 2017 to the justice.

Hosted in the United States and without a director of the clearly identified publication, the site regularly published illegal content without being worried by the authorities. Until November 8 and the badignment, by the prosecutor of the Republic, the famous operators summoned to block his access. A collective victory according to Frédéric Potier, prefect and
Inter-ministerial delegate to the fight against racism, anti-Semitism and anti-LGBT hatred (DILCRAH), the source of the first reports more than a year ago.

How do you welcome this judicial decision?

This is a real victory for us DILCRAH. Since but 2017, we have reported this site to justice nine times for antisemitic or homophobic articles. There was a police investigation, but it did not identify the author of these contents, it was difficult to initiate proceedings.

On report of the @Dilcrah and badociations Justice today asks internet providers to make inaccessible a site known for its hate messages. A victory that calls others. @_LICRA_ @SOS_Racisme @LDH_Fr @uejf @Le_CRIF #participative democracy

– Frédéric Potier (@FPotier_Dilcrah) November 27, 2018

This is a collective victory since all the anti-racist badociations then mobilized to directly appeal to the public prosecutor. And it was he who led the proceedings to a conclusion with this judicial decision. Finally, it is a symbolic victory because the site was identified and visited and an operational victory since we now have a procedure for blocking a criminal site.

How is this decision unpublished?

This is certainly not the first time that blocking a site is ordered by the courts. There was a precedent in 2005, in particular. But these procedures are particularly rare when it comes to "hate speech". Unlike terrorist or child badgraphy content, cutting off access to a hate site is not easy. In the case of the "participatory democracy" site, the judge hearing the application for interim relief considered that this was not a problem related to freedom of expression. He acknowledged that the site threatened public order by calling for violent badault. This site violated French law,
and I welcome his blockage.

However, we are aware that this site will try to be reborn elsewhere, under another name, another web address. It is a hydra, one cuts a head and several repel. But the new site will have lost influence, the costs to host elsewhere are not negligible. With this decision, we are hurting these people despite everything.

Has the legal route become the preferred way to fight against hate speech on the Internet?

We work on three sites. The first is to update the law. The last, the law for trust in the digital economy, dates from 2004. Twitter did not exist, Facebook either. The Prime Minister has announced a revision of this law and the creation of new legislation on hate content. In particular, we will be inspired by what the Germans are doing in this area with significant reports and fines in the event of non-withdrawal. The second project is based on helping to moderate hate content,
especially on Facebook. And the last project focuses on the counter-speech, the alternative discourse. It was decided to fund several badociations such as "Digital Generation" or "Respect Zone" to help them develop critical thinking or counter-speech. But what is certain is that
this judicial decision will appeal to others.