A defense lawyer based in Paris stated that the case involving Durov is another instance of prosecutors trying to restrict freedom of speech and target encrypted networks. French defense lawyers criticized the legal grounds for prosecuting Telegram CEO Pavel Durov, describing it as “incoherent,” “absurd,” and “dangerous.” Durov was arrested and then released on 5 million euros bail, with restrictions preventing him from leaving France. The defense lawyer highlighted the prosecutors’ actions as part of a trend in France to limit freedom of speech and crack down on encrypted platforms. The charges against Durov include allegations of complicity in illicit activities on Telegram, which could result in severe penalties. The defense lawyer criticized the prosecutors for targeting Durov personally instead of the company, suggesting that the charges were intended to pressure him to comply. The lawyer also mentioned similar cases involving other tech executives, indicating a broader pattern of restricting internet freedom. Another lawyer specializing in encryption cases emphasized the conflict between privacy protections and law enforcement pressure in France. The lawyer warned against undermining fundamental principles of French criminal law in cases like the Telegram affair. The defense lawyer noted that recent legal actions in cases related to encrypted networks contradicted France’s tradition of strong privacy laws. Overall, the lawyers expressed concerns about the erosion of freedom of speech and privacy rights in the face of increased scrutiny on encrypted platforms. Binsard explained to The Epoch Times that they are utilizing all available resources to close accounts, surveil individuals, and more.
In an article published in Le Point, Binsard and another French lawyer, Guillaume Martine, highlighted a persistent bias among French judges against messaging services like WhatsApp, Signal, and Snapchat.
Regarding the Durov/Telegram case, Binsard compared it to holding a car rental company responsible for drug trafficking or blaming postal executives for child abuse images sent through the mail by a pedophile.
He emphasized that the lack of cooperation from Telegram post-offense does not constitute complicity, as it does not facilitate the crime beforehand.
French President Emmanuel Macron asserted during his visit to Belgrade that the decision to arrest Durov was an independent action by French justice.
Marian noted that French prosecutors tend to avoid politically unpopular moves and investigations, unlike their counterparts in the UK and US, who operate with more independence.
She also highlighted the influence of political pressure on judges in France, citing their dependence on the President for career advancement and the judiciary tribunal for support.
Marian expressed concern over the lack of consequences for prosecutors who exceed their authority and emphasized the apathy of the French public towards cases like Durov’s, as they do not see themselves directly affected.
Overall, the French people seem indifferent to the implications of the Durov case on free speech, with most viewing it as a matter concerning criminals rather than the general population.
Source link
