CONFINEMENT: This Tuesday, the Nice Administrative Court must study a challenge on the restriction of freedom with the weekend confinement in the Alpes-Maritimes
Is the partial and localized confinement decided by the prefect of the Alpes-Maritimes an appropriate response to the increase in the number of cases of coronavirus Covid-19 in the department? For 240 people who have decided to challenge its legality in court, the answer is clearly “no”. The Nice Administrative Court is due to study their summary release procedure Tuesday at 2 pm.
“We consider that the order of the prefect is not proportionate”, slice the lawyer from Nice Zia Oloumi, associated with Me Xavier Fruton to carry the voice of these “240 citizens of all backgrounds domiciled in 06″.
“Nothing justifies partial confinement, he attacks. Does that mean that the virus only circulates on weekends? This measure does not make sense. The doctor-mayor of Antibes Jean Léonetti denounced it. Two specialists from the CHU de Nice, but also people from the CHUs of Toulouse and Montpellier, also spoke out against it. ”
“On what scientific bases? “
Decided over two weekends (at least) for 63 municipalities on the coastal strip, this hitherto unprecedented partial containment measure was announced on February 22nd after a visit to Nice by the Minister of Health. Olivier Véran then asked the prefect to “continue to consult with elected officials” with a view to “additional measures”, which could range from “a reinforced curfew to local confinement at weekends”.
As for the agglomeration of Dunkirk, the second option was therefore finally retained. “But on what scientific bases ?, asks the lawyer. We don’t know. As we do not know how the perimeter was established. How to explain, for example, that the municipality of Tourettes-Levens is confined while that of Levens, larger, is excluded from the system? On what basis were his choices made? Are there any clusters that we don’t know exist? ”
A very late publication of the decree
The decree was only published on Friday around 1:30 p.m., just a few hours before its entry into force, not allowing for a faster appeal. On this point, the prefect responded on Monday. “I am not unaware of the criticisms towards me concerning such a late publication. But it was linked to the need to legally consolidate the device by issuing a decree at the national level, ”explained Bernard Gonzalez.
Decree allowing “the legal coverage essential to the action of the representative of the state in the department”, which was only validated overnight from Thursday to Friday.
For the rest, the 240 plaintiffs await answers from the prefecture during the proceedings in the administrative court on Tuesday.
